[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <86509a5e6656c4f560ee6f6514ab00a232994957.camel@alliedtelesis.co.nz>
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2020 21:11:56 +0000
From: Chris Packham <Chris.Packham@...iedtelesis.co.nz>
To: "andy.shevchenko@...il.com" <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
CC: "linux-spi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>,
"mark.rutland@....com" <mark.rutland@....com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"broonie@...nel.org" <broonie@...nel.org>,
"robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] spi: Add generic SPI multiplexer
Hi Andy,
On Mon, 2020-02-03 at 11:50 +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
Other comments all accepted and will be addressed in v5.
>
> ...
>
>
> > + priv->mux = devm_mux_control_get(&spi->dev, NULL);
> > + ret = PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO(priv->mux);
>
> This is a bit complicated.
>
> > + if (ret) {
>
> Why not simple do
>
> if (IS_ERR(priv->mux)) {
> ret = PTR_ERR(...);
> ...
> }
>
> ?
I've had other maintainers/reviewers suggest the opposite for patches
I've submitted to other subsystems which is why I went with
PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO. It also works well with the goto err_put_ctlr; which
needs ret to be set. It's not exactly a common pattern in the spi code
so I'd be happy to go the other way if that's the desired convention
for spi.
>
> > + if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER)
> > + dev_err(&spi->dev, "failed to get control-mux\n");
> > + goto err_put_ctlr;
> > + }
> > + ctlr->dev.of_node = spi->dev.of_node;
>
> I'm wondering why SPI core can't handle this by default (like GPIO
> subsystem does).
>
We do have it for spi devices in of_register_spi_device(). I'm not
aware of any reason spi_register_controller() couldn't do the same for
controllers. It would affect a large number of drivers so should
probably be separate to this series. It's probably reasonably
automatable with coccinelle.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists