[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <33f6f9e66c8143515d36d17bf33d95362830f83f.camel@codeconstruct.com.au>
Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2023 01:35:26 +0800
From: Jeremy Kerr <jk@...econstruct.com.au>
To: Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>
Cc: devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 2/2] mfd: syscon: allow reset control for syscon
devices
Hi Lee,
> > @@ -124,7 +127,17 @@ static struct syscon *of_syscon_register(struct device_node *np, bool check_clk)
> > } else {
> > ret = regmap_mmio_attach_clk(regmap, clk);
> > if (ret)
> > - goto err_attach;
> > + goto err_attach_clk;
> > + }
> > +
> > + reset = of_reset_control_get_optional_exclusive(np, NULL);
> > + if (IS_ERR(reset)) {
> > + ret = PTR_ERR(reset);
> > + goto err_attach_clk;
> > + } else {
> > + ret = reset_control_deassert(reset);
> > + if (ret)
> > + goto err_reset;
> > }
>
> The else is superfluous, right?
Yep, we could move that reset_control_deassert() out of the else block.
If there are no other changes, I'll send a v4 with that.
Cheers,
Jeremy
Powered by blists - more mailing lists