On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 06:06:05PM +0800, Baolin Wang wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 5:16 PM Baolin Wang <baolin.wang7@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 4:31 PM Chunyan Zhang <zhang.lyra@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > From: Chunyan Zhang <chunyan.zhang@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > It would be better to cleanup the sprd_port for the device before
> > > return error.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Chunyan Zhang <chunyan.zhang@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/tty/serial/sprd_serial.c | 4 +++-
> > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/sprd_serial.c b/drivers/tty/serial/sprd_serial.c
> > > index 9f8c14ff6454..54477de9822f 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/tty/serial/sprd_serial.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/sprd_serial.c
> > > @@ -1204,8 +1204,10 @@ static int sprd_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > > up->has_sysrq = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SERIAL_SPRD_CONSOLE);
> > >
> > > ret = sprd_clk_init(up);
> > > - if (ret)
> > > + if (ret) {
> > > + sprd_port[index] = NULL;
> >
> > 如果我们强制使用alias, 则这里应该也无需清除了，因为一进probe就会给它重新赋值。 还是我漏了什么？
>
> Sorry, please ignore my previsous comment. I made a stupid mistake
> when talking with Chunyan.
>
> So what I mean is we should not add this clean up, cause we will
> always get the correct index with aliases, and it will be overlapped
> when probing again.
So ignore this patch and only take patch 1/2? If so, can I get your
acked-by for it?
thanks,
greg k-h
