Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] gpiolib: Follow usual pattern for gpiod_remove_lookup_table() call

[Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Jan 04, 2021 at 03:24:47PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 9:06 PM Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > The usual pattern for the remove calls, like gpiod_remove_lookup_table(),
> > is to be NULL-aware, i.o.w. become a no-op whenever parameter is NULL.
> > Update gpiod_remove_lookup_table() call to follow this pattern.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c | 4 ++++
> >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
> > index b02cc2abd3b6..611d6ea82d75 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
> > @@ -3460,6 +3460,10 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(gpiod_add_lookup_table);
> >   */
> >  void gpiod_remove_lookup_table(struct gpiod_lookup_table *table)
> >  {
> > +       /* Nothing to remove */
> > +       if (!table)
> > +               return;
> > +
> >         mutex_lock(&gpio_lookup_lock);
> >
> >         list_del(&table->list);
> > --
> > 2.29.2
> >
> 
> Applied, thanks!

Thanks. Though I think it can be also applied to I²C tree since dependency?
Any tags / immutable branch for Wolfram?

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko