Re: [PATCH -next v2] pinctrl: artpec6: Fix return value check in artpec6_pmx_probe()

[Jesper Nilsson <jesper.nilsson@xxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 09:43:07AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 3:40 PM, Jesper Nilsson <jesper.nilsson@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 11:29:30AM +0000, Wei Yongjun wrote:
> >> From: Wei Yongjun <weiyongjun1@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >>
> >> In case of error, the function pinctrl_register() returns
> >> ERR_PTR() not NULL. The NULL test in the return value check
> >> should be replaced with IS_ERR().
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Wei Yongjun <weiyongjun1@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Acked-by: Jesper Nilsson <jesper.nilsson@xxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Although I'm wondering if moving to pinctrl_register_and_init()
> > would sense here. Linus?
> 
> That depends, check on the commits introducing it for the
> usecase.
> 
> OTOMH it was introduced for when you have hogs in drivers
> doing all set-up of groups and functions from the device tree.

Yeah, so in this case it is not necessary, but
the comment above pinctrl_register() explicitly says:
"To avoid issues later on, please use the
new pinctrl_register_and_init() below instead."
Which to me indicates that it is recommended
to use the pinctrl_register_and_init() in future code...

> Tony?
> 
> Yours,
> Linus Walleij

/^JN - Jesper Nilsson
-- 
               Jesper Nilsson -- jesper.nilsson@xxxxxxxx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-gpio" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html