From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.16]) (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 1A2E439FC0; Mon, 12 Feb 2024 11:52:14 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.16 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1707738736; cv=none; b=M7XOTWt0nxFJm1FaEXAcX8eOzEqEvFhiJqU0HQuOFpgybLM3s22JxKdVSpEbr5j1JJ6aJuIuM4TaSNx7829hmp8olvDxVkbmZi1oin8fpkUuSla8beipGt7iE7Ge3Gk16KYtze/jP5GOQ07zErt/G62dFz8Z0aIB19mGHB7Zo9o= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1707738736; c=relaxed/simple; bh=PV2lBZbbqCKXVMgJIwrV7NXS33dE9Xu1xgpMJAFRNHk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=n56lhxK+nS8tnrK7mg7HIUdCig1moO2lpu39eSbfqpPqtPrwpe63Z5nz0bSi7CkerkL29FaGdnGNfc7DiNgDrJdFPfa30TjL0w+gTbLaV4+X0rI2LicVHYmxuEcGhjU3JjUS60N+vRDpUMPEuApD8lBSe2CI2klf0W/RUSEXHDk= 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=Ai43QcZW; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.16 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="Ai43QcZW" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1707738735; x=1739274735; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=PV2lBZbbqCKXVMgJIwrV7NXS33dE9Xu1xgpMJAFRNHk=; b=Ai43QcZWmdkNVWfWgjlEgre95b5H99LHtK77e+DSJrBAj/3NF35++aUj Gqb72gdy2kdlmex/2rKC2EUlRhkd/0NLSBeP8kdeX9O13cYDX7+3dSjxs fXCkn/a0QYrhESWYPwfuXjw1I3C2pg+g9V1is3lygoisFhYORDX9kGQnR gOhuE4gEI7veuRBLhhvh6WVlZL1AhRjVXjFj6xzg+61VYmaWQGYPAic8U ZFyOortGEei8mHNjM8irRUbhCXKMPwfDLKs+BmF5UlBB/srYjM92bePOR SgCxsNIuZzZNUKR90LrOixEEmh96a/g/vGKbaGcoAhr5ey+IEWrnykNh0 g==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10981"; a="2055195" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.06,263,1705392000"; d="scan'208";a="2055195" Received: from fmsmga002.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.26]) by fmvoesa110.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 12 Feb 2024 03:52:14 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10981"; a="911460587" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.06,263,1705392000"; d="scan'208";a="911460587" Received: from smile.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.54]) by fmsmga002.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 12 Feb 2024 03:52:12 -0800 Received: from andy by smile.fi.intel.com with local (Exim 4.97) (envelope-from ) id 1rZUr3-00000003svU-3miA; Mon, 12 Feb 2024 13:52:09 +0200 Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2024 13:52:09 +0200 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Raag Jadav Cc: u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de, jarkko.nikula@linux.intel.com, mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com, lakshmi.sowjanya.d@intel.com, linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] pwm: dwc: simplify error handling Message-ID: References: <20240208070529.28562-1-raag.jadav@intel.com> <20240208070529.28562-4-raag.jadav@intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-pwm@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: Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo On Fri, Feb 09, 2024 at 10:33:01PM +0200, Raag Jadav wrote: > On Thu, Feb 08, 2024 at 07:22:13PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 08, 2024 at 12:35:27PM +0530, Raag Jadav wrote: ... > > > + return dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "Failed to enable device (%pe)\n", ERR_PTR(ret)); > > > > Have you checked the output? > > Note, it will duplicate error codes which we don't want. > > True. Does it make sense to remove it? "...which we don't want." had been stated above :-) -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko