From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thierry Reding Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI: tegra: Use PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2017 17:09:16 +0200 Message-ID: <20170829150916.GA17659@ulmo> References: <1504013940-16304-1-git-send-email-himanshujha199640@gmail.com> <20170829135517.GA30733@ulmo> <20170829141401.GA18389@himanshu-Vostro-3559> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="6TrnltStXW4iwmi0" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170829141401.GA18389@himanshu-Vostro-3559> Sender: linux-tegra-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Himanshu Jha Cc: bhelgaas-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, jonathanh-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, linux-tegra-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-pci-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org --6TrnltStXW4iwmi0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 07:44:01PM +0530, Himanshu Jha wrote: > On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 03:55:17PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 07:09:00PM +0530, Himanshu Jha wrote: > > > Use PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO rather than if(IS_ERR(...)) + PTR_ERR > > >=20 > > > Signed-off-by: Himanshu Jha > > > --- > > > drivers/pci/host/pci-tegra.c | 5 +---- > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-) > > >=20 > > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/host/pci-tegra.c b/drivers/pci/host/pci-tegr= a.c > > > index 9c40da5..90cda5b 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/pci/host/pci-tegra.c > > > +++ b/drivers/pci/host/pci-tegra.c > > > @@ -1156,10 +1156,7 @@ static int tegra_pcie_resets_get(struct tegra_= pcie *pcie) > > > return PTR_ERR(pcie->afi_rst); > > > =20 > > > pcie->pcie_xrst =3D devm_reset_control_get_exclusive(dev, "pcie_x"); > > > - if (IS_ERR(pcie->pcie_xrst)) > > > - return PTR_ERR(pcie->pcie_xrst); > > > - > > > - return 0; > > > + return PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO(pcie->pcie_xrst); > > > } > >=20 > > I'm not a big fan of this construct because it's a pain to undo this if > > ever we need to add code to this function. But since we do have scripts > > that will flag this, I guess this would pop up every now and again. The > > driver is unlikely to change in this part, too, so: >=20 > What do you suggest ? Shall I stop sending these patches ? No, it's fine. I'm just saying that there are cases where this doesn't make sense. In this case I think it's fine because the driver is fairly mature and unlikely to change, so there is not a lot of potential for churn later on. In other cases, use your best judgement. Ultimately it is up to maintainers whether or not they apply this kind of patch. Thierry --6TrnltStXW4iwmi0 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEiOrDCAFJzPfAjcif3SOs138+s6EFAlmlg5kACgkQ3SOs138+ s6HMxg/9FcmRwZMbZKG5CklkngzSeLIQUcvTvVsphfdQJ6A2KtO8ovbQLhzAnK5G Bua2K/o2Md6p/jfOxP3qp9zQ+S4nfQbxOpWlvAFRWKTT/8Qy+61hSF9ahMe9QDEC ZQQGnR5dX7Ler3CR7OXIIY4y7YJFSter5yJOMihP51IvDZJosi1d6yA02z5CXZqR CI+wch0Zuun3n4TkZhuW/ZEEG2UNtRqOziAYdKgHKQ+ZaXmigcuCZarbcbbfYNVS LFYA0cdTZgtmFlGWcwmVPkshUlkk+MICLBXdEUtpH2rbRcyzGXF4vswXhCu1esnN /QfRjeAbA/B1GlaIsoQ70ovFNYD3JOKGqHPh+6QZj+K0cQy/LrU+1vMBZ3S9Nfv7 F3Z7S2kmBu39N8XK3SQZWxrcieiE+tmPGU57L636WbPcQaBUQbGhxaFftppfL0o8 mlvtn9utbslUja5aFtf0jp+kFQzODB17nXfGnDfUgzSpoKZvWPRj88YgNDMt8Wva mFwE9UzXvs62GP1OKdlyZLsrX+bA1likRtAcGEdOO2gWvo+FRYl6x+dd/xRCQQ7F eyf9CEC+hCH6NPEB0UbHie2uKVU96A8aZsqSEjTS19BPuGQb6/2JYdUpOtVg95Xc KsBulpKUQe26iVH2BlwihPes1ycKtGDP9iMXQTfGkQv2ZeAuVoQ= =kM1S -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --6TrnltStXW4iwmi0-- From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752963AbdH2PJW (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Aug 2017 11:09:22 -0400 Received: from mail-wm0-f67.google.com ([74.125.82.67]:33195 "EHLO mail-wm0-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751801AbdH2PJU (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Aug 2017 11:09:20 -0400 Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2017 17:09:16 +0200 From: Thierry Reding To: Himanshu Jha Cc: bhelgaas@google.com, jonathanh@nvidia.com, linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI: tegra: Use PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO Message-ID: <20170829150916.GA17659@ulmo> References: <1504013940-16304-1-git-send-email-himanshujha199640@gmail.com> <20170829135517.GA30733@ulmo> <20170829141401.GA18389@himanshu-Vostro-3559> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="6TrnltStXW4iwmi0" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170829141401.GA18389@himanshu-Vostro-3559> User-Agent: Mutt/1.8.3 (2017-05-23) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --6TrnltStXW4iwmi0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 07:44:01PM +0530, Himanshu Jha wrote: > On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 03:55:17PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 07:09:00PM +0530, Himanshu Jha wrote: > > > Use PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO rather than if(IS_ERR(...)) + PTR_ERR > > >=20 > > > Signed-off-by: Himanshu Jha > > > --- > > > drivers/pci/host/pci-tegra.c | 5 +---- > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-) > > >=20 > > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/host/pci-tegra.c b/drivers/pci/host/pci-tegr= a.c > > > index 9c40da5..90cda5b 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/pci/host/pci-tegra.c > > > +++ b/drivers/pci/host/pci-tegra.c > > > @@ -1156,10 +1156,7 @@ static int tegra_pcie_resets_get(struct tegra_= pcie *pcie) > > > return PTR_ERR(pcie->afi_rst); > > > =20 > > > pcie->pcie_xrst =3D devm_reset_control_get_exclusive(dev, "pcie_x"); > > > - if (IS_ERR(pcie->pcie_xrst)) > > > - return PTR_ERR(pcie->pcie_xrst); > > > - > > > - return 0; > > > + return PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO(pcie->pcie_xrst); > > > } > >=20 > > I'm not a big fan of this construct because it's a pain to undo this if > > ever we need to add code to this function. But since we do have scripts > > that will flag this, I guess this would pop up every now and again. The > > driver is unlikely to change in this part, too, so: >=20 > What do you suggest ? Shall I stop sending these patches ? No, it's fine. I'm just saying that there are cases where this doesn't make sense. In this case I think it's fine because the driver is fairly mature and unlikely to change, so there is not a lot of potential for churn later on. In other cases, use your best judgement. Ultimately it is up to maintainers whether or not they apply this kind of patch. Thierry --6TrnltStXW4iwmi0 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEiOrDCAFJzPfAjcif3SOs138+s6EFAlmlg5kACgkQ3SOs138+ s6HMxg/9FcmRwZMbZKG5CklkngzSeLIQUcvTvVsphfdQJ6A2KtO8ovbQLhzAnK5G Bua2K/o2Md6p/jfOxP3qp9zQ+S4nfQbxOpWlvAFRWKTT/8Qy+61hSF9ahMe9QDEC ZQQGnR5dX7Ler3CR7OXIIY4y7YJFSter5yJOMihP51IvDZJosi1d6yA02z5CXZqR CI+wch0Zuun3n4TkZhuW/ZEEG2UNtRqOziAYdKgHKQ+ZaXmigcuCZarbcbbfYNVS LFYA0cdTZgtmFlGWcwmVPkshUlkk+MICLBXdEUtpH2rbRcyzGXF4vswXhCu1esnN /QfRjeAbA/B1GlaIsoQ70ovFNYD3JOKGqHPh+6QZj+K0cQy/LrU+1vMBZ3S9Nfv7 F3Z7S2kmBu39N8XK3SQZWxrcieiE+tmPGU57L636WbPcQaBUQbGhxaFftppfL0o8 mlvtn9utbslUja5aFtf0jp+kFQzODB17nXfGnDfUgzSpoKZvWPRj88YgNDMt8Wva mFwE9UzXvs62GP1OKdlyZLsrX+bA1likRtAcGEdOO2gWvo+FRYl6x+dd/xRCQQ7F eyf9CEC+hCH6NPEB0UbHie2uKVU96A8aZsqSEjTS19BPuGQb6/2JYdUpOtVg95Xc KsBulpKUQe26iVH2BlwihPes1ycKtGDP9iMXQTfGkQv2ZeAuVoQ= =kM1S -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --6TrnltStXW4iwmi0--