On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 03:37:24PM +0200, Robert Foss wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Mar 2020 at 16:01, Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 4:36 PM Robert Foss <robert.foss@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
...
> > > + if (ret < 0) {
> >
> > Do you need all ' < 0' parts all over the series?
>
> Some checks are needed due to ACPI and DT support co-existing.
> Maybe it would be better to just split the probing into an ACPI path
> and a DT path.
>
> I'll have a look through the series for redundant retval checks.
Drop where it is redundant.
...
> > > - ret = fwnode_property_read_u32(fwnode, "clock-frequency", &mclk);
> > > - if (ret)
> > > - return ret;
> >
> > Where is it gone? Why?
>
> It was replaced by a clk_get_rate call, which as Sakari pointed out,
> isn't correct.
> I'll rework the clock handling for v4.
If it was in the driver it should stay -- properties is an ABI (between firmware and kernel).
> > > + ov8856->xvclk = devm_clk_get_optional(dev, "xvclk");
> > > + if (IS_ERR(ov8856->xvclk)) {
> >
> > > + dev_err(dev, "could not get xvclk clock (%ld)\n",
> > > + PTR_ERR(ov8856->xvclk));
> >
> > Also you may use %pe here and in similar cases.
>
> Weirdly checkpatch complains about this.
> But it builds and runs cleanly, so I'll add it in v4.
%pe requires pointer, PTR_ERR converts pointer to integer.
...
> > > + ret = devm_regulator_bulk_get(dev, ARRAY_SIZE(ov8856_supply_names),
> > > + ov8856->supplies);
> > > + if (ret) {
> >
> > > + dev_warn(dev, "failed to get regulators\n");
> >
> > If it's a warning, why we return from here?
> > Same question to all other places with same issue.
>
> The issue I was seeing was the driver having to return a EDEFER here,
> so this warning sheds some light on which exact component is returning
> an EDEFER.
>
> [ 15.962623] ov8856 16-0010: Dropping the link to regulator.29
> [ 15.968464] ov8856 16-0010: failed to get regulators
> [ 15.973493] ov8856 16-0010: failed to get HW configuration: -517
> [ 15.979591] ov8856 16-0010: removing from PM domain titan_top_gdsc
> [ 15.985855] ov8856 16-0010: genpd_remove_device()
> [ 15.990672] i2c 16-0010: Driver ov8856 requests probe deferral
>
> Personally I found it helpful to speed up debugging, but I'll happily
> remove it if you prefer no warning.
My point is that you have it in align:
- if it is an error, print as an error and bail out, otherwise
- if it is a warning, print it and continue.
> > > + return ret;
> > > }
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
