Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 01:18:59PM CEST, poros@redhat.com wrote:
>Arkadiusz Kubalewski píše v Pá 09. 06. 2023 v 14:18 +0200:
>> From: Vadim Fedorenko <vadim.fedorenko@linux.dev>

[...]

Could you perhaps cut out the text you don't comment? Saves some time
finding your reply.


>> +static int
>> +dpll_set_from_nlattr(struct dpll_device *dpll, struct genl_info
>> *info)
>> +{
>> +       const struct dpll_device_ops *ops = dpll_device_ops(dpll);
>> +       struct nlattr *tb[DPLL_A_MAX + 1];
>> +       int ret = 0;
>> +
>> +       nla_parse(tb, DPLL_A_MAX, genlmsg_data(info->genlhdr),
>> +                 genlmsg_len(info->genlhdr), NULL, info->extack);
>> +       if (tb[DPLL_A_MODE]) {
>Hi,
>
>Here should be something like:
>               if (!ops->mode_set)
>                       return -EOPNOTSUPP;

Why? All drivers implement that.
I believe that it's actullaly better that way. For a called setting up
the same mode it is the dpll in, there should be 0 return by the driver.
Note that driver holds this value. I'd like to keep this code as it is.

[...]