linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 02/24] Input: gpio_keys

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 26 Aug 2020 22:39:12 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
Cc:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
        Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Bastien Nocera <hadess@...ess.net>,
        Sangwon Jee <jeesw@...fas.com>,
        Eugen Hristev <eugen.hristev@...rochip.com>,
        "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@...nel.org>,
        linux-input <linux-input@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Platform Driver <platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/24] Input: gpio_keys - Simplify with dev_err_probe()

On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 10:23 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 10:13:34PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 08:16:44PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > Common pattern of handling deferred probe can be simplified with
> > > dev_err_probe().  Less code and also it prints the error value.
> >
> > > --- a/drivers/input/keyboard/gpio_keys.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/input/keyboard/gpio_keys.c
> > > @@ -505,10 +505,7 @@ static int gpio_keys_setup_key(struct platform_device *pdev,
> > >                              */
> > >                             bdata->gpiod = NULL;
> >
> > gpiod_get_optional()?
> > Do not see much context though (but please double check your series for these
> > kind of things).
>
> It would fit except it is devm_fwnode_gpiod_get() which does not have
> optional yet.
>
> I can add it although the scope of the patch grows from simple
> defer-path-simplification.

No need. My comment only about existing API per individual cases. SO,
here it's fine then.

> Thanks for the feedback.

You're welcome!

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko