[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACRpkdbDNbEpNOLT31+8Jb_fdvnROOtONxFc0hxCFa5AotSwTw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 13 May 2025 11:26:52 +0200
From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>
Cc: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@....qualcomm.com>,
Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>, Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
Josh Cartwright <joshc@...eaurora.org>, Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@...il.com>,
Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] pinctrl: qcom: don't crash on enabling GPIO HOG pins
Hi Dmitry,
thanks for your patch!
On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 7:28 PM Bartosz Golaszewski
<bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org> wrote:
> On Sat, 3 May 2025 at 07:32, Dmitry Baryshkov
> <dmitry.baryshkov@....qualcomm.com> wrote:
> > + /*
> > + * hog pins are requested before registering GPIO chip, don't crash in
> > + * gpiochip_line_is_valid().
> > + */
> > + if (!chip->gpiodev)
> > + return 0;
> > +
>
> I really dislike you dereferencing gpiodev here which is (implicitly,
> I know...) very much a private structure for GPIOLIB. Can we move this
> into gpiochip_line_is_valid() itself?
I agree with Bartosz. Patch gpiochip_line_is_valid() so everyone
can benefit from the extended check.
Thanks!
Linus Walleij
Powered by blists - more mailing lists