From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: yamada.masahiro@socionext.com (Masahiro Yamada) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 21:29:19 +0900 Subject: [PATCH 2/2] reset: uniphier: use of_device_get_match_data() to get matched data In-Reply-To: <1472041622.5335.32.camel@pengutronix.de> References: <1472020830-16059-1-git-send-email-yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> <1472020830-16059-3-git-send-email-yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> <1472041622.5335.32.camel@pengutronix.de> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi Philipp, 2016-08-24 21:27 GMT+09:00 Philipp Zabel : > Hi Masahiro, > > Am Mittwoch, den 24.08.2016, 15:40 +0900 schrieb Masahiro Yamada: >> Use of_device_get_match_data() instead of of_match_node(). With >> this, we can retrieve the .data field of the OF match table more >> easily. No more need to define (or declare) the match table before >> the probe callback. I prefer to collect boilerplates at the bottom >> of the file, so moved it below. >> >> Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada >> --- >> >> drivers/reset/reset-uniphier.c | 81 +++++++++++++++++++++--------------------- >> 1 file changed, 40 insertions(+), 41 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/reset/reset-uniphier.c b/drivers/reset/reset-uniphier.c >> index 41c62af..9b3f2cd 100644 >> --- a/drivers/reset/reset-uniphier.c >> +++ b/drivers/reset/reset-uniphier.c >> @@ -16,6 +16,7 @@ >> #include >> #include >> #include >> +#include >> #include >> #include >> #include >> @@ -285,6 +286,45 @@ static const struct reset_control_ops uniphier_reset_ops = { >> .status = uniphier_reset_status, >> }; >> >> +static int uniphier_reset_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >> +{ >> + struct device *dev = &pdev->dev; >> + struct uniphier_reset_priv *priv; >> + const struct uniphier_reset_data *p, *data; >> + struct regmap *regmap; >> + struct device_node *parent; >> + unsigned int nr_resets = 0; >> + >> + data = of_device_get_match_data(dev); >> + WARN_ON(!data); > > I know right now this can't happen anyway, but you did return -EINVAL > here before. Maybe use: > > if (WARN_ON(!data)) > return -EINVAL; > > instead? I can fix it up if you agree. I agree. Please fix it up. Thanks! -- Best Regards Masahiro Yamada