On Tue, Sep 04, 2012 at 07:46:02PM +0800, Dong Aisheng wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 04, 2012 at 07:35:45PM +0800, Andi Shyti wrote:
> > Hi Dong,
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 04, 2012 at 11:20:08AM +0800, Dong Aisheng wrote:
> > > +static int __devinit syscon_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > > +{
> > > + struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> >
> > Do we really need this variable? Anyway you are using it only
> > once in the dev_info.
> >
> Okay, i can remove it.
On Tue, Sep 04, 2012 at 04:16:59PM +0400, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
> But Dong definitely could use it more than once, so it seems useful.
[sorry for pasting your e-mail here]
yes, but he is using it only once and, it's easily
reachable with pdev->dev and anyway Dong is using &pdev->dev.
> > > +
> > > + syscon = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(struct syscon),
> > > + GFP_KERNEL);
> >
> > in case of error you are not freeing syscon.
> Do we need it for managed resource of syscon?
Yes, you're right :)
> > Moreover, in my opinion, some dev_err more should not heart
^^
as Sergei points out is 'hurt'... mistype :)
> There's no much error cases here, most of them rarely fails and i don't feel
> we really need add.
> I don't know what dev_err you suggested to add?
For example some failure cases, anyway i read quickly the code
and I don't big see issues.
Andi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
