From: w.sang@pengutronix.de (Wolfram Sang)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v3 1/2] ads7846: fix gpio free without requesting
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 17:48:23 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110203164823.GF6508@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4D4AD7CF.7040103@compulab.co.il>
> > I wonder if it makes sense to merge both patches under the name of "fix
> > gpio-handling" or similar. Not sure, though...
>
> I'd rather not do that, because this patch fixes the request/free problem
> and the second is changing the functionality (e.g. configures the gpio as input)
Ack.
>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/input/touchscreen/ads7846.c b/drivers/input/touchscreen/ads7846.c
> >> index 14ea54b..ce5baee 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/input/touchscreen/ads7846.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/input/touchscreen/ads7846.c
> >> @@ -952,6 +952,7 @@ static int __devinit ads7846_setup_pendown(struct spi_device *spi, struct ads784
> >>
> >> if (pdata->get_pendown_state) {
> >> ts->get_pendown_state = pdata->get_pendown_state;
> >> + ts->gpio_pendown = -EINVAL;
> >> return 0;
> >> }
> > Will probably work, but maybe it is better to reorganize the code to
> > just have one success-exit-point. That would be mean adding an else
> > branch to this if-block.
>
> This is something that can be done, though I fear the code readability
> will suffer. Is it worth?
I thought it to be more readable to have one-entry-one-OK-exit. But
actually I don't mind that much.
>
> >>
> >> @@ -1353,7 +1354,7 @@ static int __devinit ads7846_probe(struct spi_device *spi)
> >> err_put_regulator:
> >> regulator_put(ts->reg);
> >> err_free_gpio:
> >> - if (ts->gpio_pendown != -1)
> >> + if (gpio_is_valid(ts->gpio_pendown))
> > You could do the same in the remove-path.
>
> You mean, _should_... ;)
Yes, I meant that :)
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Wolfram Sang |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20110203/5fbdbf31/attachment.sig>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-02-03 16:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-02-03 15:21 [PATCH v3 1/2] ads7846: fix gpio free without requesting Sourav Poddar
2011-02-03 15:47 ` Wolfram Sang
2011-02-03 16:29 ` Igor Grinberg
2011-02-03 16:48 ` Wolfram Sang [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20110203164823.GF6508@pengutronix.de \
--to=w.sang@pengutronix.de \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).