[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YbrId5gnJSjeT1Ni@google.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2021 13:02:47 +0800
From: Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@...gle.com>
To: Trevor Wu <trevor.wu@...iatek.com>
Cc: broonie@...nel.org, tiwai@...e.com, robh+dt@...nel.org,
matthias.bgg@...il.com, alsa-devel@...a-project.org,
linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, jiaxin.yu@...iatek.com,
shumingf@...ltek.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ASoC: mediatek: mt8195: update control for RT5682
series
On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 11:37:34AM +0800, Trevor Wu wrote:
> On Wed, 2021-12-15 at 16:20 +0800, Tzung-Bi Shih wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 15, 2021 at 02:58:34PM +0800, Trevor Wu wrote:
> > > @@ -1072,6 +1119,19 @@ static int
> > > mt8195_mt6359_rt1011_rt5682_dev_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > > return -EINVAL;
> > > }
> > >
> > > + priv->i2so1_mclk = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, "i2so1_mclk");
> > > + if (IS_ERR(priv->i2so1_mclk)) {
> > > + ret = PTR_ERR(priv->i2so1_mclk);
> > > + if (ret == -ENOENT) {
> > > + dev_dbg(&pdev->dev,
> > > + "Failed to get i2so1_mclk, defer
> > > probe\n");
> > > + return -EPROBE_DEFER;
> > > + }
> >
> > Does devm_clk_get_optional() could make the block more concise?
>
> Even though we use devm_clk_get_optional, we still have to handle the
> (-ENOENT) case in probe function. In my opinion, original
> implementation could be kept.
I am neutral to my original suggestion but devm_clk_get_optional() returns NULL if -ENONENT.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists