Re: [PATCH] PCI: rcar: fix return value check in rcar_pci_probe()

[Valentine <valentine.barshak@cogentembedded.com>]

On 12/11/2013 06:30 AM, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 09, 2013 at 10:46:17AM +0900, Jingoo Han wrote:
>> On Sunday, December 08, 2013 7:50 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 11:40:28AM +0800, Wei Yongjun wrote:
>>>> From: Wei Yongjun <yongjun_wei@trendmicro.com.cn>
>>>>
>>>> In case of error, the function devm_ioremap_resource() returns ERR_PTR()
>>>> and never returns NULL. The NULL test in the return value check should
>>>> be replaced with IS_ERR().
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Wei Yongjun <yongjun_wei@trendmicro.com.cn>
>>>
>>> Applied with Jingoo's reviewed-by to pci/host-rcar for v3.14, thanks!
>>>
>>> For drivers/pci/host/*, I normally look for an ack from the responsible
>>> person,  but this patch is trivial enough that I'm fine taking it without
>>> that.  But for more significant changes, I don't have any notes about who
>>> should own pci-rcar-gen2.c.  Valentine could be a candidate since he added
>>> it in the first place?  Or Jingoo?

Sorry, I didn't ack since I thought it was not really needed for a trivial
change like this one that had already been reviewed by Jingoo.

>>
>> (+cc Simon Horman, Magnus Damm, Kuninori Morimoto, linux-sh mailing-list)
>>
>> Hi Bjorn,
>>
>> I think that Valentine could be a candidate, because he is an author.
>> However, pci-rcar-gen2.c is working on Renesas SoC, so, it may be
>> necessary to get ACK from Renesas people such as Simon Horman,
>> Magnus Damm, and Kuninori Morimoto.
>>
>> Simon Horman, Magnus Damm, and Kuninori Morimoto,
>> Who is a proper person responsible for RCar Gen PCIe driver?
>> (drivers/pci/host/pci-rcar-gen2.c)
>
> Good question.
>
> My feeling is that as it relates to Renesas ARM SoCs that
> responsibility at least in part defaults to the Renesas ARM SoC
> maintainers, Magnus and myself.
>
> So I think it would be best if the following were CCed on any patches
> to this driver:
>
> Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>
> Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@gmail.com>
> linux-sh@vger.kernel.org

I agree.

>
> I would not be opposed for there being a MAINTAINERS file entry to that effect.
>
> I will let Valentine volunteer himself if he wants to.

I'll try to track the e-mails related to this driver as well.

Not sure if I want myself in the MAINTAINERS though, since it would probably
mean that "try to" should be changed to "have to" in my statement above.

Thanks,
Val.

>
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Jingoo Han
>>
>>>
>>> Bjorn
>>>
>>>> ---
>>>>   drivers/pci/host/pci-rcar-gen2.c | 4 ++--
>>>>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/host/pci-rcar-gen2.c b/drivers/pci/host/pci-rcar-gen2.c
>>>> index cbaa5c4..96d1182 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/pci/host/pci-rcar-gen2.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/pci/host/pci-rcar-gen2.c
>>>> @@ -276,8 +276,8 @@ static int __init rcar_pci_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>>
>>>>   	cfg_res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 0);
>>>>   	reg = devm_ioremap_resource(&pdev->dev, cfg_res);
>>>> -	if (!reg)
>>>> -		return -ENODEV;
>>>> +	if (IS_ERR(reg))
>>>> +		return PTR_ERR(reg);
>>>>
>>>>   	mem_res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 1);
>>>>   	if (!mem_res || !mem_res->start)
>>>>
>>