2013-06-28 10:33:55

by Axel Lin

Subject: [PATCH] pinctrl: st: Fix checking return value of syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle()

syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle() returns ERR_PTR on error.

Signed-off-by: Axel Lin <[email protected]>
---
drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c
index 7effedf..f95c82a 100644
--- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c
+++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c
@@ -1299,9 +1299,9 @@ static int st_pctl_probe_dt(struct platform_device *pdev,
return -ENOMEM;

info->regmap = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle(np, "st,syscfg");
- if (!info->regmap) {
+ if (IS_ERR(info->regmap)) {
dev_err(info->dev, "No syscfg phandle specified\n");
- return -ENOMEM;
+ return PTR_ERR(info->regmap);
}
info->data = of_match_node(st_pctl_of_match, np)->data;

--
1.8.1.2

2013-06-28 10:42:05

by Srinivas KANDAGATLA

Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: st: Fix checking return value of syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle()

Thankyou Axel for looking at this.

There is already a patch is submitted for this.
https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/6/26/494 which I have Acked.

Thanks,
srini
On 28/06/13 11:33, Axel Lin wrote:
> syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle() returns ERR_PTR on error.
>
> Signed-off-by: Axel Lin <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c
> index 7effedf..f95c82a 100644
> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c
> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c
> @@ -1299,9 +1299,9 @@ static int st_pctl_probe_dt(struct platform_device *pdev,
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> info->regmap = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle(np, "st,syscfg");
> - if (!info->regmap) {
> + if (IS_ERR(info->regmap)) {
> dev_err(info->dev, "No syscfg phandle specified\n");
> - return -ENOMEM;
> + return PTR_ERR(info->regmap);
> }
> info->data = of_match_node(st_pctl_of_match, np)->data;
>
>

2013-06-28 12:16:47

by Axel Lin

Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: st: Fix checking return value of syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle()

2013/6/28 Srinivas KANDAGATLA <[email protected]>:
> Thankyou Axel for looking at this.
>
> There is already a patch is submitted for this.
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/6/26/494 which I have Acked.

That is strange.
I don't think the patch you mentioned can be applied to current pinctrl tree.
Current code does check pinctrl_register by IS_ERR.

info->pctl = pinctrl_register(pctl_desc, &pdev->dev, info);
if (IS_ERR(info->pctl)) {

Regards,
Axel

2013-06-28 14:01:32

by Srinivas KANDAGATLA

Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: st: Fix checking return value of syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle()

On 28/06/13 13:16, Axel Lin wrote:
> 2013/6/28 Srinivas KANDAGATLA <[email protected]>:
>> Thankyou Axel for looking at this.
>>
>> There is already a patch is submitted for this.
>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/6/26/494 which I have Acked.
>
> That is strange.
> I don't think the patch you mentioned can be applied to current pinctrl tree.
> Current code does check pinctrl_register by IS_ERR.
The patch removes the IS_ERR, because, pinctrl_register returns NULL or
a valid pointer, using IS_ERR is this case is incorrect.

Thanks,
srini
>
> info->pctl = pinctrl_register(pctl_desc, &pdev->dev, info);
> if (IS_ERR(info->pctl)) {

>
> Regards,
> Axel
>

2013-06-28 14:24:26

by Axel Lin

Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: st: Fix checking return value of syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle()

2013/6/28 Srinivas KANDAGATLA <[email protected]>:
> On 28/06/13 13:16, Axel Lin wrote:
>> 2013/6/28 Srinivas KANDAGATLA <[email protected]>:
>>> Thankyou Axel for looking at this.
>>>
>>> There is already a patch is submitted for this.
>>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/6/26/494 which I have Acked.
>>
>> That is strange.
>> I don't think the patch you mentioned can be applied to current pinctrl tree.
>> Current code does check pinctrl_register by IS_ERR.
> The patch removes the IS_ERR, because, pinctrl_register returns NULL or
> a valid pointer, using IS_ERR is this case is incorrect.
You are right.

Thanks,
Axel