On 04/04/2024 15:52, Anand Moon wrote:
> Hi Greg,
>
> On Thu, 4 Apr 2024 at 18:30, Greg Kroah-Hartman
> <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 04, 2024 at 12:43:17PM +0530, Anand Moon wrote:
>>> The devm_clk_get_enabled() helpers:
>>> - call devm_clk_get()
>>> - call clk_prepare_enable() and register what is needed in order to
>>> call clk_disable_unprepare() when needed, as a managed resource.
>>>
>>> This simplifies the code and avoids the calls to clk_disable_unprepare().
>>>
>>> While at it, use dev_err_probe consistently, and use its return value
>>> to return the error code.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Anand Moon <linux.amoon@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> V2: drop the clk_disable_unprepare in suspend/resume functions
>>> fix the usb_put_hcd return before the devm_clk_get_enabled
>>> ---
>>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-exynos.c | 19 +++++--------------
>>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/usb/host/ehci-exynos.c b/drivers/usb/host/ehci-exynos.c
>>> index f644b131cc0b..f00bfd0b13dc 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/usb/host/ehci-exynos.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/usb/host/ehci-exynos.c
>>> @@ -159,20 +159,15 @@ static int exynos_ehci_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>
>>> err = exynos_ehci_get_phy(&pdev->dev, exynos_ehci);
>>> if (err)
>>> - goto fail_clk;
>>> -
>>> - exynos_ehci->clk = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, "usbhost");
>>> + goto fail_io;
>>>
>>> + exynos_ehci->clk = devm_clk_get_enabled(&pdev->dev, "usbhost");
>>> if (IS_ERR(exynos_ehci->clk)) {
>>> - dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Failed to get usbhost clock\n");
>>> - err = PTR_ERR(exynos_ehci->clk);
>>> - goto fail_clk;
>>> + usb_put_hcd(hcd);
>>> + return dev_err_probe(&pdev->dev, PTR_ERR(exynos_ehci->clk),
>>> + "Failed to get usbhost clock\n");
>>
>> Why is this logic changed?
>>
>> If you want to call dev_err_probe(), that's great, but do NOT mix it up
>> with a commit that does something totally different.
>>
>> When you say something like "while at it" in a changelog text, that is a
>> HUGE hint that it needs to be a separate commit. Because of that reason
>> alone, I can't take these, you know better :(
>>
>> thanks,
>>
>
> Ok, I will improve the commit message relevant to the code changes.
Please read Greg's message one more time. He did not propose to fix
commit msg, right?
Best regards,
Krzysztof
