Re: [PATCH net-next v2 1/7] clk: Add devm_clk_bulk_get_enable()

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Low] The kerneldoc for devm_clk_bulk_get_enable() incorrectly states that it returns a valid IS_ERR() condition on failure.
--

--- Patch [1]: [PATCH net-next v2 1/7] clk: Add devm_clk_bulk_get_enable() ---
commit 319855f04a85138c6a1bce0e994003875d466d17
Author: Suraj Gupta <suraj.gupta2@amd.com>

clk: Add devm_clk_bulk_get_enable()

This commit introduces devm_clk_bulk_get_enable() to allow consumers to
get, prepare, and enable a fixed set of mandatory clocks with device-managed
cleanup.

> diff --git a/include/linux/clk.h b/include/linux/clk.h
> index 998ba3f261dac..0289ac4c6e48e 100644
> --- a/include/linux/clk.h
> +++ b/include/linux/clk.h

[ ... ]

> @@ -502,6 +502,22 @@ int __must_check devm_clk_bulk_get(struct device *dev, int num_clks,
>   */
>  int __must_check devm_clk_bulk_get_optional(struct device *dev, int num_clks,
>  					    struct clk_bulk_data *clks);
> +/**
> + * devm_clk_bulk_get_enable - Get and enable bulk clocks (managed)
> + * @dev: device for clock "consumer"
> + * @num_clks: the number of clk_bulk_data
> + * @clks: pointer to the clk_bulk_data table of consumer
> + *
> + * Behaves the same as devm_clk_bulk_get() but also prepares and enables the
> + * clocks in one operation with management. The clks will automatically be
> + * disabled, unprepared and freed when the device is unbound.
> + *
> + * Return: 0 if all clocks specified in clk_bulk_data table are obtained and
> + * enabled successfully. Otherwise returns valid IS_ERR() condition containing
> + * errno.
> + */
> +int __must_check devm_clk_bulk_get_enable(struct device *dev, int num_clks,
> +					  struct clk_bulk_data *clks);

[Severity: Low]
Is this return description accurate for an integer return type? The function
returns an int, but the documentation suggests checking it with IS_ERR(),
which is designed for pointers. Using IS_ERR() on an int return value will
trigger compiler warnings. Should this just say it returns a negative error
code on failure?

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260806181153.1213996-1-suraj.gupta2@amd.com?part=1