Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-152428-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
Message-ID: <c24dc77d4c339d1b1ba4a76cf7c365d970cfca41.camel@perches.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] remove indentation for common path [linux-next]
From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To: sundar <prosunofficial@gmail.com>, heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com, 
	gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, neil.armstrong@linaro.org, 
	dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org, u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de, 
	christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr
Cc: linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, 
	skhan@linuxfoundation.org, javier.carrasco.cruz@gmail.com
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2024 18:27:44 -0700
In-Reply-To: <b6f3d628-077e-486a-97f2-267324a76e9c@gmail.com>
References: <20240420164927.15290-1-prosunofficial@gmail.com>
	 <a51f703d4f8dc3b0917002c520ea6608ac642b75.camel@perches.com>
	 <b6f3d628-077e-486a-97f2-267324a76e9c@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
User-Agent: Evolution 3.48.4 (3.48.4-1.fc38) 
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0

On Sun, 2024-04-21 at 06:13 +0530, sundar wrote:
> On 20/04/24 22:37, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Sat, 2024-04-20 at 22:19 +0530, sundar wrote:
> >=20
> >=20
> > > ```
> > @@ -321,35 +321,37 @@ static int nb7vpq904m_parse_data_lanes_mapping(st=
ruct nb7vpq904m *nb7)
> >  =20
> >   	ep =3D of_graph_get_endpoint_by_regs(nb7->client->dev.of_node, 1, 0)=
;
> >  =20
> > -	if (ep) {
> > -		ret =3D of_property_count_u32_elems(ep, "data-lanes");
> > -		if (ret =3D=3D -EINVAL)
> > -			/* Property isn't here, consider default mapping */
> > -			goto out_done;
> > -		if (ret < 0)
> > -			goto out_error;
> > -
> > -		if (ret !=3D DATA_LANES_COUNT) {
> > -			dev_err(&nb7->client->dev, "expected 4 data lanes\n");
> > -			ret =3D -EINVAL;
> > -			goto out_error;
> > -		}
> > +	if (!ep)
> > +		return 0;
> > ```
> >=20
> >=20
> > Not equivalent code as the out_error:
> >=20
> > 	of_node_put(ep);
> >=20
> > isn't done
> >=20
> >=20
>=20
> Hi joe perches,
>=20
> If ep is null,  I believe we dont need to call of_node_put.  Because=20
> passing null pointer to of_node_put() make no difference.
>=20
> In of_node_put() definition, if pointer is null, there is no operation.
>=20

Fine, but you should explain that in the changelog
and not make reviewers look it up.