On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 11:58:08AM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote: > On Fri, Mar 07, 2014 at 04:08:36PM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 07, 2014 at 03:59:30PM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > > @@ -900,7 +902,8 @@ mv64xxx_i2c_probe(struct platform_device *pd) > > > exit_free_irq: > > > free_irq(drv_data->irq, drv_data); > > > exit_reset: > > > - if (pd->dev.of_node && !IS_ERR(drv_data->rstc)) > > > + if (pd->dev.of_node && IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RESET_CONTROLLER) && > > > + !IS_ERR(drv_data->rstc)) > > > reset_control_assert(drv_data->rstc); > > > > Another question is... why do we need to check pd->dev.of_node here? > > If CONFIG_RESET_CONTROLLER is set, we always try to get the reset > > controller node, so drv_data->rstc is either going to be a valid > > pointer, or it's going to be an error pointer - neither > > reset_control_get() nor devm_reset_control_get return NULL. > > Following back on this as I was doing the patch, actually, > drv_data->rstc will be NULL if we're not probed by DT, and hence never > call reset_control_get, that would set an error pointer. > > But then, we can use IS_ERR_OR_NULL on drv_data->rstc. I think you can also move the devm_reset_control_get() into the main probe function: you're only checking for -EPROBE_DEFER from it to fail, allowing other errors to continue with the driver init. This means that on non-OF, devm_reset_control_get() will fail with -ENOENT. -- FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: now at 9.7Mbps down 460kbps up... slowly improving, and getting towards what was expected from it. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
