On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 9:18 AM Miaoqian Lin <linmq006@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi, Andy Shevchenko > > On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 09:04:06AM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > > > In the error handling path, the clk_prepare_enable() function > > > call should be balanced by a corresponding 'clk_disable_unprepare()' > > > call, as already done in the remove function. > > > > > > It’s not good to mix devm approach with non-devm. > > > Thanks for your review. I'm sorry, I don't quite understand. Could you please explain more? What functions are your referring to? Thanks. Your entire patch is broken. The error handling in ->probe() and complete ->remove() now have asymmetrical ordering. On top of that the CCF is NULL aware (and error pointer IIRC), so no need to have additional checks. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
