Re: [PATCH] spi: coldfire-qspi: Remove an erroneous clk_disable_unprepare() from the remove function

From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Yuanjun Gong <ruc_gongyuanjun@163.com>,
	 Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr>
Cc: alexis.lothore@bootlin.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	 kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, linux-spi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] spi: coldfire-qspi: Remove an erroneous clk_disable_unprepare() from the remove function
Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2024 18:36:09 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <170447976960.321446.8658938868485382767.b4-ty@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6670aed303e1f7680e0911387606a8ae069e2cef.1704464447.git.christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr>

On Fri, 05 Jan 2024 15:21:00 +0100, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
> The commit in Fixes has changed a devm_clk_get()/clk_prepare_enable() into
> a devm_clk_get_enabled().
> It has updated the error handling path of the probe accordingly, but the
> remove has been left unchanged.
> 
> Remove now the redundant clk_disable_unprepare() call from the remove
> function.
> 
> [...]

Applied to

   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/spi.git for-next

Thanks!

[1/1] spi: coldfire-qspi: Remove an erroneous clk_disable_unprepare() from the remove function
      commit: 17dc11a02d8dacc7e78968daa2a8c16281eb7d1e

All being well this means that it will be integrated into the linux-next
tree (usually sometime in the next 24 hours) and sent to Linus during
the next merge window (or sooner if it is a bug fix), however if
problems are discovered then the patch may be dropped or reverted.

You may get further e-mails resulting from automated or manual testing
and review of the tree, please engage with people reporting problems and
send followup patches addressing any issues that are reported if needed.

If any updates are required or you are submitting further changes they
should be sent as incremental updates against current git, existing
patches will not be replaced.

Please add any relevant lists and maintainers to the CCs when replying
to this mail.

Thanks,
Mark