[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150401070001.GP17728@pengutronix.de>
Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2015 09:00:01 +0200
From: Uwe Kleine-König
<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: f.fainelli@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linus.walleij@...aro.org, acourbot@...dia.com,
kernel@...gutronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] net: phy: at803x: simplify using
devm_gpiod_get_optional and its 4th argument
On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 07:28:38PM -0400, David Miller wrote:
> From: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
> Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 22:08:45 +0200
>
> > I still think assigning directly to priv->gpiod_reset would fine
> > because having the priv->gpiod_reset NULL is neither more nor less
> > right that ERR_PTR(-ESOMETHING).
>
> You really want to push my buttons don't you? :-/
>
> What if someone adds a new resource allocation after this thing and
> then adds an unwind path where something has to be done to the GPIOD
> as part of cleanup?
As I assume that v2 still addresses your concerns it would be ok for me
to not fully agree with you about defensive coding style.
What about you?
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists