Re: [PATCH v3 02/18] pinctrl: pinctrl-single: remove dead code in suspend() and resume() callbacks

Thomas Richard
2024-02-21T11:01:52Z

On 2/16/24 16:08, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 08:59:47AM +0100, Thomas Richard wrote:
>> On 2/15/24 16:27, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>> On Thu, Feb 15, 2024 at 04:17:47PM +0100, Thomas Richard wrote:
>>>> No need to check the pointer returned by platform_get_drvdata(), as
>>>> platform_set_drvdata() is called during the probe.
>>>
>>> This patch should go _after_ the next one, otherwise the commit message doesn't
>>> tell full story and the code change bring a potential regression.
>>
>> Hello Andy,
>>
>> I'm ok to move this patch after the next one.
>> But for my understanding, could you explain me why changing the order is
>> important in this case ?
>
> Old PM calls obviously can be called in different circumstances and these
> checks are important.
>
> Just squash these two patches to avoid additional churn and we are done.

You mean invert the order instead of squash.

--
Thomas Richard, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering