[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aF6cVFA7NpN2S273@e129823.arm.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2025 14:27:48 +0100
From: Yeoreum Yun <yeoreum.yun@....com>
To: Leo Yan <leo.yan@....com>
Cc: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>,
Mike Leach <mike.leach@...aro.org>,
James Clark <james.clark@...aro.org>,
Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
coresight@...ts.linaro.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 01/10] coresight: tmc: Support atclk
Hi Leo,
[...]
> @@ -789,6 +789,10 @@ static int __tmc_probe(struct device *dev, struct resource *res)
> struct coresight_desc desc = { 0 };
> struct coresight_dev_list *dev_list = NULL;
>
> + drvdata->atclk = devm_clk_get_optional_enabled(dev, "atclk");
> + if (IS_ERR(drvdata->atclk))
> + return PTR_ERR(drvdata->atclk);
> +
> ret = -ENOMEM;
>
Just another quetion.
If this function is called from tmc_platform_probe() and failed,
should it call the clk_put() for drvdata->pclk when it failed?
--
Sincerely,
Yeoreum Yun
Powered by blists - more mailing lists