Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 8 Aug 2023 13:31:31 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 2/9] i2c: mlxbf: Use dev_err_probe in probe function | From | Krzysztof Kozlowski <> |
| |
On 08/08/2023 13:29, Andi Shyti wrote: > Hi Krzysztof, > > On Tue, Aug 08, 2023 at 10:36:40AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 08/08/2023 03:29, Liao Chang wrote: >>> Use the dev_err_probe function instead of dev_err in the probe function >>> so that the printed messge includes the return value and also handles >>> -EPROBE_DEFER nicely. >>> >>> Reviewed-by: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@kernel.org> >>> Signed-off-by: Liao Chang <liaochang1@huawei.com> >> >> ... >> >>> @@ -2413,10 +2399,8 @@ static int mlxbf_i2c_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >>> ret = devm_request_irq(dev, irq, mlxbf_i2c_irq, >>> IRQF_SHARED | IRQF_PROBE_SHARED, >>> dev_name(dev), priv); >>> - if (ret < 0) { >>> - dev_err(dev, "Cannot get irq %d\n", irq); >>> - return ret; >>> - } >>> + if (ret < 0) >>> + return dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "Cannot get irq %d\n", irq); >> >> I don't think this is needed: >> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230721094641.77189-1-frank.li@vivo.com/ > > Hmm, that's a bit borderline, I'd say. The change to
What's borderline exactly? devm_request_threaded_irq_probe() is coming, right? If it is accepted this hunk is useless and soon should be replaced with proper one.
Instead of making many trivial changes doing the same, all these series should be aligned.
> devm_request_irq/devm_request_threaded_irq_probe seems like > something for another series. But for now, I think I'll accept > this as it is since it fits within the scope of this current > series.
Best regards, Krzysztof
| |