lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Feb]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 04/20] pinctrl: Record a pin owner, not mux function, when requesting pins
    From
    On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 6:23 PM, Stephen Warren <swarren@nvidia.com> wrote:
    > Linus Walleij wrote at Monday, February 20, 2012 2:15 PM:
    >> >
    >> > -       if (!function) {
    >> > -               dev_err(pctldev->dev, "no function name given\n");
    >> > -               return -EINVAL;
    >> > -       }
    >> > -
    >>
    >> Why should it be allowed to have a NULL owner? There is a
    >> debug print involving it above but ... maybe this is over-cautious?
    >
    > My reasoning was that this is an internal function, so this isn't a user-
    > supplied parameter we need to be paranoid about checking, and the places
    > that call this function internally "obviously" don't pass NULL owner.
    > Well, I suppose one place relies on the fact we checked elsewhere that
    > map->dev_name != NULL.
    >
    > Still, I can see a defensive programming argument for keeping that check,
    > although I suspect if we apply that argument we should probably check a
    > lot more things too throughout the code?

    Bah whatever, no big deal.

    Patch applied!

    Thanks,
    Linus Walleij
    --
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2012-02-22 07:19    [W:0.022 / U:0.448 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site