On 2/16/24 16:08, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 08:59:47AM +0100, Thomas Richard wrote: >> On 2/15/24 16:27, Andy Shevchenko wrote: >>> On Thu, Feb 15, 2024 at 04:17:47PM +0100, Thomas Richard wrote: >>>> No need to check the pointer returned by platform_get_drvdata(), as >>>> platform_set_drvdata() is called during the probe. >>> >>> This patch should go _after_ the next one, otherwise the commit message doesn't >>> tell full story and the code change bring a potential regression. >> >> Hello Andy, >> >> I'm ok to move this patch after the next one. >> But for my understanding, could you explain me why changing the order is >> important in this case ? > > Old PM calls obviously can be called in different circumstances and these > checks are important. > > Just squash these two patches to avoid additional churn and we are done. You mean invert the order instead of squash. -- Thomas Richard, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com
