From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EFE1A7345E for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2024 12:15:10 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.14 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1718626512; cv=none; b=YrW+dfsHjvNJkeqEqkFGBq+SVVYk3ptRMtQirn6fSWjOni4APzHSd9zhr2SXWg4DbDVXMe7ozsfOqRW/k81ip7I38Uci7YV23gedc1sqqI9QroNDvIqVY5EdMP49UK3Mvco5sdnXXYRBLH5gNA/+OilDQ6N7ipdSt7cGRrm+PMo= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1718626512; c=relaxed/simple; bh=UWmoXljec8lSoo7KP2L71LZ8feX+k/XSvb8J3Uy7NSs=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=RsB23vVJIGm5oPjDAE3V1zXLjEuXksoc+U0TwJyN47k8daNJ2y9G6hd9ix3SKgx2nCJqjtVnJzjNXig5TBxN3QwsYMiIhStajX/IkpebRB1xu5ZrnQST3GdtNSc8ULfGADiu1n3EHYyYnRS51vmHG++zFxQXI/zoy11yskcDA4E= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=aZ07UC55; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.14 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="aZ07UC55" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1718626511; x=1750162511; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=UWmoXljec8lSoo7KP2L71LZ8feX+k/XSvb8J3Uy7NSs=; b=aZ07UC55mX/MJRkqoDMCNmooKvtXfKb8QYLFb4n0JdJPpvxX5jOQiW9r IEk4lbcxT3oRCvbbCog4Bq2rqOQqIcjGA3g5cO8aw3O9Y5pImOBlYpn/b KBpmbCbLYMOoWDMRFK3JF0bYM6v+ZQpbrppzo6oy8r2bsPUXqn7KdOXM8 HCtzhFXH4q5UcdIciO3GpwLQ2x59l+pIh2jzSRCRlRaKv2WugqbXi9xyg 1mKS9xMVs92xHhTk4H8oBHDTiP6oVg5bmE4gPmmtjPhUsCaBxIqjIwlua yDPVbkhrug9ZJWi054jz5BMfTXV/SdgP9L2aSPpJgnH2HuGGA/aUbMGq2 g==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: TUhjZslPSA6wEauJCMgDXA== X-CSE-MsgGUID: lhx1rYL3SyGqHsbzshVkVw== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6700,10204,11105"; a="15676806" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.08,244,1712646000"; d="scan'208";a="15676806" Received: from orviesa003.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.143]) by fmvoesa108.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 17 Jun 2024 05:15:10 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: ZWjYR8XiSlWuNqVk5g5ruQ== X-CSE-MsgGUID: YpOuIl+kRPC60ML6rQXJlw== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.08,244,1712646000"; d="scan'208";a="46105561" Received: from turnipsi.fi.intel.com (HELO kekkonen.fi.intel.com) ([10.237.72.44]) by ORVIESA003-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 17 Jun 2024 05:15:10 -0700 Received: from kekkonen.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by kekkonen.fi.intel.com (Postfix) with SMTP id BBB6C11F7E1; Mon, 17 Jun 2024 15:15:06 +0300 (EEST) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2024 12:15:06 +0000 From: Sakari Ailus To: Hans Verkuil Cc: linux-media@vger.kernel.org, laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 08/26] media: mc: Do not call cdev_device_del() if cdev_device_add() fails Message-ID: References: <20240610100530.1107771-1-sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com> <20240610100530.1107771-9-sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-media@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Hi Hans, On Mon, Jun 17, 2024 at 11:13:57AM +0200, Hans Verkuil wrote: > On 10/06/2024 12:05, Sakari Ailus wrote: > > cdev_device_del() is the right function to remove a device when > > cdev_device_add() succeeds. If it does not, however, put_device() needs to > > be used instead. Fix this. > > Hmm, this too is due to a revert patch (03/26) removing something that needs > to be reinstated. > > Wouldn't it be better to fold this into 04/26, with a comment in the commit > log of that commit? I agree, I'll fold it there. > > The problem with this commit log is that it suggests that it fixes a bug, > when really it just corrects something introduced by a revert. -- Kind regards, Sakari Ailus