On 2/9/21 10:12 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Alex, > > Thanks for your patch! > > On Sun, Feb 7, 2021 at 4:08 PM <alex_luca@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> From: Zhang Kun <zhangkun@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >> The parameters of sh_pfc_enum_in_range() pinmux_range *r should be checked >> first for possible null ponter, especially when PINMUX_TYPE_FUNCTION as the >> pinmux_type was passed by sh_pfc_config_mux(). > > If pinmux_type in sh_pfc_config_mux() is PINMUX_TYPE_FUNCTION or > PINMUX_TYPE_GPIO, range is indeed NULL. > But as the call > > in_range = sh_pfc_enum_in_range(enum_id, range); > > is not done in case of these pinmux types, I don't see where the > problem is. What am I missing? > Oh, you are right. I think I know what I missed. Thank you. Alex
