On Tue, Aug 20, 2024 at 10:01:07AM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> Quoting Andy Shevchenko (2024-08-20 03:16:09)
> > On Mon, Aug 19, 2024 at 03:38:19PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > > + ptr = devres_alloc(devm_typec_switch_unregister, sizeof(*ptr), GFP_KERNEL);
> > > + if (!ptr)
> > > + return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
> > > +
> > > + switch_dev = typec_switch_register(parent ,desc);
(Side note: wrong location of the white space)
> > > + if (!IS_ERR(switch_dev)) {
(Side note: positive conditional is okay)
> > > + *ptr = switch_dev;
> > > + devres_add(parent, ptr);
> > > + } else {
> > > + devres_free(ptr);
> > > + }
> >
> > devm_add_action_or_reset() ?
>
> No. We don't want to call the 'action' devm_typec_switch_unregister()
> when it fails because that would unregister a switch that has never been
> registered.
Hmm... With devm_add_action_or_reset() we first do things and then try to add
them to the managed resources. In that case it won't be like you described.
What do I miss?
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
