Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
From:   Phil Edworthy <phil.edworthy@renesas.com>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
CC:     Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>,
        Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
        =?iso-8859-1?Q?Uwe_Kleine-K=F6nig?= 
        <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>,
        "linux-clk@vger.kernel.org" <linux-clk@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v9 1/2] clk: Add comment about __of_clk_get_by_name()
 error values
Thread-Topic: [PATCH v9 1/2] clk: Add comment about __of_clk_get_by_name()
 error values
Thread-Index: AQHUivk3i4Y+f5/feUuqUWNTx+pZGqVtAtEAgASlWYA=
Date:   Thu, 6 Dec 2018 12:30:52 +0000
Message-ID: <TY1PR01MB1769B12A216ED3E76A40A6B7F5A90@TY1PR01MB1769.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
References: <20181203111309.3709-1-phil.edworthy@renesas.com>
 <20181203111309.3709-2-phil.edworthy@renesas.com>
 <20181203133040.GN10650@smile.fi.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <20181203133040.GN10650@smile.fi.intel.com>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: renesas.com does not designate
 permitted sender hosts)
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: fcaf1fb9-b9ce-4dc4-6a7e-08d65b76a9a2
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 06 Dec 2018 12:30:52.8047
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 53d82571-da19-47e4-9cb4-625a166a4a2a
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: TY1PR01MB1561
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Hi Andy,

On 03 December 2018 13:31 Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 11:13:08AM +0000, Phil Edworthy wrote:
> > It's not immediately obvious from the code that failure to get a clock
> > provider can return either -ENOENT or -EINVAL. Therefore, add a
> > comment to highlight this.
>=20
> > +/*
> > + * Beware the return values when np is valid, but no clock provider is
> found.
> > + * If name =3D NULL, the function returns -ENOENT.
> > + * If name !=3D NULL, the function returns -EINVAL. This is because
> > +__of_clk_get()
>=20
> I would start new sentence from new line (this will emphasize the possibl=
e
> variants)
>=20
>  * This is ...
I disagree, the explanation is specifically related to the case where the f=
unction
returns -EINVAL. Though this is a nit, so I'm not really bothered either wa=
y.

Thanks for the review!
Phil

>  Otherwise looks good to me:
>=20
> Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
>=20
> > + * is called even if of_property_match_string() returns an error.
> > + */
> >  static struct clk *__of_clk_get_by_name(struct device_node *np,
> >  					const char *dev_id,
> >  					const char *name)
> > --
> > 2.17.1
> >
>=20
> --
> With Best Regards,
> Andy Shevchenko
>=20