On 7 October 2017 at 12:36, Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Fix the drivers and add some docs according to the outcome of this discussion > [1] we had recently. The motivation from the patch description: > > Bail out everytime when mmc_regulator_get_supply() returns an errno, not only > when probing gets deferred. This is currently a no-op, because this function > only returns -EPROBE_DEFER or 0 right now. But if it will throw another error > somewhen, it will be for a reason. (This still doesn't change that getting > regulators is optional, so 0 can still mean no regulators found). So, let us a) > be future proof and b) have driver code which is easier to understand. > > The patches have been created with coccinelle. A branch can be found here: > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/wsa/linux.git renesas/mmc-get-supply-docs > > Looking forward to comments! > > Kind regards, > > Wolfram > > [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9965823/ > > Wolfram Sang (11): > mmc: add kerneldoc to mmc_regulator_get_supply() > mmc: cavium: catch all errors when getting regulators > mmc: dw_mmc: catch all errors when getting regulators > mmc: meson-gx-mmc: catch all errors when getting regulators > mmc: meson-mx-sdio: catch all errors when getting regulators > mmc: mmci: catch all errors when getting regulators > mmc: mtk-sd: catch all errors when getting regulators > mmc: mxcmmc: catch all errors when getting regulators > mmc: omap_hsmmc: catch all errors when getting regulators > mmc: sdhci: catch all errors when getting regulators > mmc: usdhi6rol0: catch all errors when getting regulators > > drivers/mmc/core/core.c | 10 ++++++++++ > drivers/mmc/host/cavium.c | 2 +- > drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c | 2 +- > drivers/mmc/host/meson-gx-mmc.c | 2 +- > drivers/mmc/host/meson-mx-sdio.c | 2 +- > drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c | 2 +- > drivers/mmc/host/mtk-sd.c | 2 +- > drivers/mmc/host/mxcmmc.c | 2 +- > drivers/mmc/host/omap_hsmmc.c | 2 +- > drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.c | 2 +- > drivers/mmc/host/usdhi6rol0.c | 2 +- > 11 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > -- Looks good to me, however as pointed out by Fabrizio, you could run a round of checkpatch (mainly about commit message format). Or perhaps even coccinelle needs an update to be adopted to requirement from checkpatch? Kind regards Uffe
