On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 12:56:25PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@xxxxxxxxxx> > > gpiochip_get() is called only in two places: in gpio_chip_get_value() > and in gpiochip_get_multiple() where the existence of the gc->get() > callback is already checked. It makes sense to unduplicate the check by > moving it one level up the stack. Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
Re: [PATCH 3/3] gpiolib: don't double-check the gc->get callback's existence
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] gpiolib: don't double-check the gc->get callback's existence
- From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2025 15:20:39 +0200
- In-reply-to: <20250225-retval-fixes-v1-3-078c4c98517a@linaro.org>
- Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo
- References: <20250225-retval-fixes-v1-0-078c4c98517a@linaro.org> <20250225-retval-fixes-v1-3-078c4c98517a@linaro.org>
- References:
- [PATCH 0/3] gpiolib: fix bugs in retval sanitization
- From: Bartosz Golaszewski
- [PATCH 3/3] gpiolib: don't double-check the gc->get callback's existence
- From: Bartosz Golaszewski
- [PATCH 0/3] gpiolib: fix bugs in retval sanitization
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 2/3] gpiolib: use a more explicit retval logic in gpiochip_get_direction()
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 1/3] gpiolib: don't use gpiochip_get_direction() when registering a chip
- Previous by thread: [PATCH 3/3] gpiolib: don't double-check the gc->get callback's existence
- Index(es):
 |