Re: [PATCH v13 2/2] Add PWM fan controller driver for LGM SoC

[Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com>]

On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 04:16:59PM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 04:23:34PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 08:55:34AM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:

...

> > True. And above dev_err_probe() is not needed.
> 
> You argue that dev_err_probe() gives no benefit as
> lgm_reset_control_deassert won't return -EPROBE_DEFER, right?
> 
> Still I consider it a useful function because
> 
>  a) I (as an author or as a reviewer) don't need to think if the
>     failing function might return -EPROBE_DEFER now or in the future.
>     dev_err_probe does the right thing even for functions that don't
>     return -EPROBE_DEFER.
> 
>  b) With dev_err_probe() I can accomplish things in a single line that
>     need two lines when open coding it.
> 
>  c) dev_err_probe() emits the symbolic error name without having to
>     resort to %pe + ERR_PTR.
> 
>  d) Using dev_err_probe() for all error paths gives a consistency that I
>     like with a maintainer's hat on.
> 
> So I still want to request using dev_err_probe() in all error paths.

As a maintainer it is your choice. I really would like to see more consensus
among maintainers, some are insisting of what I said, some, like you, on the
opposite, some hate that API and some simply don't care.

And on top of that I saw already use of API without taking returned value into
account.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko