On Sunday 20 November 2016 10:31 PM, David Lechner wrote: > On 11/20/2016 06:59 AM, Sekhar Nori wrote: >> On Saturday 19 November 2016 10:11 AM, David Lechner wrote: >>> @@ -400,6 +401,9 @@ static int davinci_spi_of_setup(struct spi_device >>> *spi) >>> if (!of_property_read_u32(np, "ti,spi-wdelay", &prop)) >>> spicfg->wdelay = (u8)prop; >>> spi->controller_data = spicfg; >>> + /* Use DMA for device if master supports it */ >>> + if (dspi->dma_rx) >> >> This should be >> >> if (!(IS_ERR(dpsi->dma_rx) || IS_ERR(dspi->dma_tx)) > > > There is the following code in davinci_spi_probe(): > > ret = davinci_spi_request_dma(dspi); > if (ret == -EPROBE_DEFER) { > goto free_clk; > } else if (ret) { > dev_info(&pdev->dev, "DMA is not supported (%d)\n", ret); > dspi->dma_rx = NULL; > dspi->dma_tx = NULL; > } > > So, I does not look like it is possible to get anything other than NULL > or a valid pointer for dpsi->dma_rx and that checking dpsi->dma_tx is > not necessary. > > So, I think if (dspi->dma_rx) is sufficient. In fact the same check is > used during unwinding if the probe function fails. You are right, I see it now. Setting dma_rx to NULL overriding the error value is confusing since dma_request_chan() itself does not use NULL as an error value. I think it is better to fix the existing code to remove the NULL overwrite and use IS_ERR() instead. You should probably wait for some feedback from the SPI maintainer though. Thanks, Sekhar -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-spi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html