On Sat, Sep 07, 2024 at 03:55:08PM +0800, Lin Ruifeng wrote:
> The combination of dev_err() and the returned error code could be
> replaced by dev_err_probe() in driver's probe function. Let's,
> converting to dev_err_probe() to make code more simple.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lin Ruifeng <linruifeng4@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/usb/musb/mediatek.c | 27 +++++++++++----------------
> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/usb/musb/mediatek.c b/drivers/usb/musb/mediatek.c
> index 0a35aab3ab81..63c86c046b98 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/musb/mediatek.c
> +++ b/drivers/usb/musb/mediatek.c
> @@ -416,10 +416,9 @@ static int mtk_musb_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> ret = of_platform_populate(np, NULL, NULL, dev);
> - if (ret) {
> - dev_err(dev, "failed to create child devices at %p\n", np);
> - return ret;
> - }
> + if (ret)
> + return dev_err_probe(dev, ret,
> + "failed to create child devices at %p\n", np);
>
> ret = mtk_musb_clks_get(glue);
> if (ret)
> @@ -448,23 +447,19 @@ static int mtk_musb_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> glue->role = USB_ROLE_NONE;
> break;
> default:
> - dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Error 'dr_mode' property\n");
> - return -EINVAL;
> + return dev_err_probe(&pdev->dev, -EINVAL,
> + "Error 'dr_mode' property\n");
> }
>
> glue->phy = devm_of_phy_get_by_index(dev, np, 0);
> - if (IS_ERR(glue->phy)) {
> - dev_err(dev, "fail to getting phy %ld\n",
> - PTR_ERR(glue->phy));
> - return PTR_ERR(glue->phy);
> - }
> + if (IS_ERR(glue->phy))
> + return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(glue->phy),
> + "fail to getting phy\n");
>
> glue->usb_phy = usb_phy_generic_register();
> - if (IS_ERR(glue->usb_phy)) {
> - dev_err(dev, "fail to registering usb-phy %ld\n",
> - PTR_ERR(glue->usb_phy));
> - return PTR_ERR(glue->usb_phy);
> - }
> + if (IS_ERR(glue->usb_phy))
> + return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(glue->usb_phy),
> + "fail to registering usb-phy\n");
>
> glue->xceiv = devm_usb_get_phy(dev, USB_PHY_TYPE_USB2);
> if (IS_ERR(glue->xceiv)) {
> --
> 2.17.1
>
>
Hi,
This is the friendly patch-bot of Greg Kroah-Hartman. You have sent him
a patch that has triggered this response. He used to manually respond
to these common problems, but in order to save his sanity (he kept
writing the same thing over and over, yet to different people), I was
created. Hopefully you will not take offence and will fix the problem
in your patch and resubmit it so that it can be accepted into the Linux
kernel tree.
You are receiving this message because of the following common error(s)
as indicated below:
- This looks like a new version of a previously submitted patch, but you
did not list below the --- line any changes from the previous version.
Please read the section entitled "The canonical patch format" in the
kernel file, Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst for what
needs to be done here to properly describe this.
If you wish to discuss this problem further, or you have questions about
how to resolve this issue, please feel free to respond to this email and
Greg will reply once he has dug out from the pending patches received
from other developers.
thanks,
greg k-h's patch email bot
