On Fri, 12 Mar 2021 at 06:33, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 11-03-21, 22:20, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> > +struct opp_table *devm_pm_opp_set_clkname(struct device *dev, const char *name)
> > +{
> > + struct opp_table *opp_table;
> > + int err;
> > +
> > + opp_table = dev_pm_opp_set_clkname(dev, name);
> > + if (IS_ERR(opp_table))
> > + return opp_table;
> > +
> > + err = devm_add_action_or_reset(dev, devm_pm_opp_clkname_release, opp_table);
> > + if (err)
> > + opp_table = ERR_PTR(err);
> > +
> > + return opp_table;
> > +}
>
> I wonder if we still need to return opp_table from here, or a simple
> integer is fine.. The callers shouldn't be required to use the OPP
> table directly anymore I believe and so better simplify the return
> part of this and all other routines you are adding here..
Yes, please. I was thinking along the same lines, when I reviewed the
mmc patch (patch9).
>
> If there is a user which needs the opp_table, let it use the regular
> non-devm variant.
Kind regards
Uffe
