Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-48018-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.80.249 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.80.249;
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2024 13:22:18 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
To: Uwe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?= <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Cc: Raag Jadav <raag.jadav@intel.com>, 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 v1 2/3] pwm: dwc: simplify error handling
Message-ID: <Zbt-6vpx1LnFBCIL@smile.fi.intel.com>
References: <20240122030238.29437-1-raag.jadav@intel.com>
 <20240122030238.29437-3-raag.jadav@intel.com>
 <ZbZpMO9b7L-DNIcb@smile.fi.intel.com>
 <r6vulwv76x7ydkmszlwlswjve7y2pmasz77wkqub73qopd5src@y3ta72owtw5b>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <r6vulwv76x7ydkmszlwlswjve7y2pmasz77wkqub73qopd5src@y3ta72owtw5b>
Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo

On Sun, Jan 28, 2024 at 05:58:38PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-K?nig wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 28, 2024 at 04:48:16PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 08:32:37AM +0530, Raag Jadav wrote:
> > > Simplify error handling in ->probe() function using dev_err_probe() helper.

..

> > >  	ret = pcim_iomap_regions(pci, BIT(0), pci_name(pci));
> > > -	if (ret) {
> > > -		dev_err(dev, "Failed to iomap PCI BAR (%pe)\n", ERR_PTR(ret));
> > > -		return ret;
> > > -	}
> > > +	if (ret)
> > > +		return dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "Failed to iomap PCI BAR (%pe)\n", ERR_PTR(ret));
> > >  
> > >  	base = pcim_iomap_table(pci)[0];
> > 
> > > -	if (!base) {
> > > -		dev_err(dev, "Base address missing\n");
> > > -		return -ENOMEM;
> > > -	}
> > > +	if (!base)
> > > +		return dev_err_probe(dev, -ENOMEM, "Base address missing\n");
> > 
> > This check is bogus. Just remove it completely.
> 
> This would be a separate patch though. IMHO mechanically converting to
> dev_err_probe() is fine.

Sure, that's what I meant. First patch to remove, followed by dev_err_probe()
conversion.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko