From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.10]) (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 6C94F5F46C for ; Thu, 29 Feb 2024 10:41:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.10 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1709203288; cv=none; b=Jf47M42HJQq3owHrtZU1xUkIMtAE8wjsB+trrEcH7rMbl5yagJHsLS62O66Y197WyFoLgZMaZRIFNwkPXzWYanM6mpw0PIxDH/e54wh5tTTO1QwWjaFEiFS0iHR+W/tqyKymVFw1hcPwivH2ts3Qn3a4prGPOnT4D3NdrdgULdg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1709203288; c=relaxed/simple; bh=qxg5mCeN0Xd6dPBZltJOVCLRNbLYaMZtIrIHS5F6WZ4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=r53TBVi234K/mOc09NckwweLOP7CpYVyNdJ1vqCrWrTir+lQ0gthfKVb8GrPR4X913JF33PduJfX+Bob0FQGAoDnDRLLAilL+6Cl0GoUiVhQsgB4AneWbdRF2U8sQInfDfrOSfBeuy734RnhphrfhuR65obxQXqoEoOQBzR4fow= 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=JfKvwEfB; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.10 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="JfKvwEfB" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1709203287; x=1740739287; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=qxg5mCeN0Xd6dPBZltJOVCLRNbLYaMZtIrIHS5F6WZ4=; b=JfKvwEfBiOO0fTkjDEzvtshFwgaMwdN05GJSti5lai33Zn3J8taQ00fe wCB+GrqSIr5pp8pe+skdKLBIxE3T9OlbJerk//nLojXkrqJaoSyjww+yF XdhDqRkir2QLqVyyRPDnlZv/ffEkiIQhk7xbyhMYnlmLXLDmHRXokrGr5 UZDDy4FF89rXS/Zt2y+5jj20yQ4MznWgHIus51By81IhNZfgi3GF+aZeG 5y7TRtM+38i/5uzALpdrGIkzcOCrioIRloPsbJUQcsiiDNjhTRowbJ6z4 9nQK+tLL1wsVhNr8+vcQ0pb+LKJ69XH/iC1faozxgtZT+e5JvpS3GE+kt A==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10998"; a="21121022" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.06,194,1705392000"; d="scan'208";a="21121022" Received: from fmsmga002.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.26]) by orvoesa102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 29 Feb 2024 02:41:27 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10998"; a="913978617" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.06,194,1705392000"; d="scan'208";a="913978617" Received: from smile.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.54]) by fmsmga002.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 29 Feb 2024 02:41:25 -0800 Received: from andy by smile.fi.intel.com with local (Exim 4.97) (envelope-from ) id 1rfdqs-00000008dyT-3J8h; Thu, 29 Feb 2024 12:41:22 +0200 Date: Thu, 29 Feb 2024 12:41:22 +0200 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Philipp Stanner Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , Rasmus Villemoes Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] devres: Switch to use dev_err_probe() for unification Message-ID: References: <20240227175910.3031342-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> <20240227175910.3031342-2-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@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 Thu, Feb 29, 2024 at 12:39:55PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Thu, Feb 29, 2024 at 09:52:34AM +0100, Philipp Stanner wrote: > > On Tue, 2024-02-27 at 19:58 +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: ... > > That way it would be obvious that the error code is never changed and > > it will always return -EINVAL. Otherwise you have to look up the > > function definition of dev_err_probe(). And to this, it's a common pattern in some cases, esp. when you have a chain of the similar calls and you want to simplify the code (see CCI accessors in Video4Linux2 as an example). So, I also don't think it's something unusual. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko