On Tue, Jul 9, 2024 at 10:37 PM Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > The first patch is completly speculative. It is based on static analysis > when a function is called in the remove() function, but not in the > error handling path of the probe. > When looking deeper at it, it seems that part of > ti_iodelay_pinconf_init_dev() also needed to be fixed. > > /!\ This is completly speculative. So review with care /!\ > > > Patch 2 and 3 are just constification patches spoted while looking at > the code. > > Christophe JAILLET (3): > pinctrl: ti: ti-iodelay: Fix some error handling paths > pinctrl: ti: ti-iodelay: Constify struct ti_iodelay_reg_data > pinctrl: ti: ti-iodelay: Constify struct regmap_config Patches 1 & 2 applied, patch 3 was already contributed by another developer. Yours, Linus Walleij
