From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Icenowy Zheng To: Boris Brezillon Cc: "maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com" , "wens@csie.org" , "robh+dt@kernel.org" , "richard@nod.at" , "dwmw2@infradead.org" , "computersforpeace@gmail.com" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-sunxi@googlegroups.com" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" In-Reply-To: <20160623180108.382bbaae@bbrezillon> References: <20160620044838.56904-1-icenowy@aosc.xyz> <20160620044838.56904-2-icenowy@aosc.xyz> <20160623180108.382bbaae@bbrezillon> Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] mtd: nand: sunxi: add reset line support MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <1284641466724038@web7h.yandex.ru> Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 07:20:38 +0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , In my opinion, return directly PTR_ERR(nfc->reset) is OK here. If devm_reset_control_get_optional() return -EPROBE_DEFER, the code here will also return it. However, if we get other error, why should it return -EPROBE_DEFER again? 24.06.2016, 00:01, "Boris Brezillon" : > On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 12:48:38 +0800 > Icenowy Zheng wrote: > >>  The NAND controller on some sun8i chips needs its reset line to be >>  deasserted before they can enter working state. >> >>  Signed-off-by: Icenowy Zheng >>  --- >>    Changes in v2: >>      - Corrected the error checking code of reset line. >> >>    Changes in v3: >>      - Corrected a more serious error brought in the "fix" of v2. >> >>    Changes in v4: >>      - Removed unneeded code block after "else". >> >>    Changes in v5: >>      - Added reassertion code in case of initialization error and device >>        remove. >> >>    Changes in v6: >>      - Fixed a resource leak by not using goto to exit in case of error. >> >>   drivers/mtd/nand/sunxi_nand.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++++++--- >>   1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >>  diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/sunxi_nand.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/sunxi_nand.c >>  index a83a690..08d5e88 100644 >>  --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/sunxi_nand.c >>  +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/sunxi_nand.c >>  @@ -39,6 +39,7 @@ >>   #include >>   #include >>   #include >>  +#include >> >>   #define NFC_REG_CTL 0x0000 >>   #define NFC_REG_ST 0x0004 >>  @@ -269,6 +270,7 @@ struct sunxi_nfc { >>           void __iomem *regs; >>           struct clk *ahb_clk; >>           struct clk *mod_clk; >>  + struct reset_control *reset; >>           unsigned long assigned_cs; >>           unsigned long clk_rate; >>           struct list_head chips; >>  @@ -1871,26 +1873,42 @@ static int sunxi_nfc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >>           if (ret) >>                   goto out_ahb_clk_unprepare; >> >>  + nfc->reset = devm_reset_control_get_optional(dev, "ahb"); >>  + >>  + if (!IS_ERR(nfc->reset)) { >>  + ret = reset_control_deassert(nfc->reset); >>  + if (ret) { >>  + dev_err(dev, "reset err %d\n", ret); >>  + goto out_mod_clk_unprepare; >>  + } >>  + } else if (PTR_ERR(nfc->reset) != -ENOENT) { >>  + ret = PTR_ERR(nfc->reset); > > You should return -EDEFER_PROBE here. > > And can you please rebase this series on top of nand/next [1]? > > [1]https://github.com/linux-nand/linux/tree/nand/next