Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-171903-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20240506150830.23709-1-johan+linaro@kernel.org>
 <20240506150830.23709-3-johan+linaro@kernel.org> <ZjknxSsyo20b5_Tm@surfacebook.localdomain>
 <ZjpCL_NQD7X3hasO@hovoldconsulting.com>
In-Reply-To: <ZjpCL_NQD7X3hasO@hovoldconsulting.com>
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 7 May 2024 20:16:45 +0300
Message-ID: <CAHp75Vf0raEoVmvRKNxDQ7wdAOtwWYp_fQ1m8WBdnWEFGFOrYA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/13] mfd: pm8008: fix regmap irq chip initialisation
To: Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org>
Cc: Johan Hovold <johan+linaro@kernel.org>, Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org>, 
	Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>, 
	Bjorn Andersson <andersson@kernel.org>, Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>, 
	Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@kernel.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>, 
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>, Das Srinagesh <quic_gurus@quicinc.com>, 
	Satya Priya <quic_c_skakit@quicinc.com>, Stephen Boyd <swboyd@chromium.org>, 
	linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, May 7, 2024 at 6:01=E2=80=AFPM Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org> wrot=
e:
> On Mon, May 06, 2024 at 09:56:05PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > Mon, May 06, 2024 at 05:08:19PM +0200, Johan Hovold kirjoitti:
> > > The regmap irq array is potentially shared between multiple PMICs and

..

> > > -                   dev_err(dev, "Failed to probe irq periphs: %d\n",=
 rc);
> > > +                   dev_err(dev, "failed to add IRQ chip: %d\n", rc);
> >
> > dev_err_probe(...); ?
>
> This function won't return -EPROBE_DEFER,

This is not an argument for a long time (since documentation of
dev_err_probe() had been amended to encourage its use for any error
cases in probe).

> and that would be a separate
> change in any case.

Sure, but why to add a technical debt? Perhaps a precursor cleanup patch?

--=20
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko