Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Wed, 13 Apr 2022 19:58:24 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
To:     "Sa, Nuno" <Nuno.Sa@analog.com>
Cc:     "linux-iio@vger.kernel.org" <linux-iio@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>,
        "Hennerich, Michael" <Michael.Hennerich@analog.com>,
        Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] iio: imu: adis16480: Fix getting the optional
 clocks
Message-ID: <YlcBMGkdmGTq/mnr@smile.fi.intel.com>
References: <20220413144124.72537-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
 <20220413144124.72537-3-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
 <PH0PR03MB67865D24BB7546CAF805D7BE99EC9@PH0PR03MB6786.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <PH0PR03MB67865D24BB7546CAF805D7BE99EC9@PH0PR03MB6786.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Apr 13, 2022 at 03:38:47PM +0000, Sa, Nuno wrote:
> > From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2022 4:41 PM

> > The extended clocks are optional and may not be present for some
> > SoCs
> > supported by this driver. Nevertheless, in case the clock is provided
> > but some error happens during its getting, that error should be
> > handled
> > properly. Use devm_clk_get_optional() API for that. Also report
> > possible
> > errors using dev_err_probe() to handle properly -EPROBE_DEFER
> > error.

> This is a nice cleanup patch... But the subject might be a bit
> misleading as it says "Fix". So I would expect a Fixes tag which
> I'm not sure it's really worth it here. Yes, the code was pretty much
> doing clk_get_optional() "by hand" but I think it was still functional.
> So to me, this is more an improvement rather than a fix...

Actually it is a fix, but not critical since no-one complains aloud so far.
The problematic part is logs exhausting if repetitive deferred probe happens.

> Anyways,
> 
> Reviewed-by: Nuno S? <nuno.sa@analog.com>

Thanks!

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko