From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Tang Bin <tangbin@cmss.chinamobile.com>
Cc: olivier.moysan@foss.st.com, arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com,
lgirdwood@gmail.com, perex@perex.cz, tiwai@suse.com,
linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Zhang Shengju <zhangshengju@cmss.chinamobile.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: stm32: spdifrx: Delete unnecessary check in the probe function
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2021 12:58:46 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210811115846.GC4167@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210811115523.17232-1-tangbin@cmss.chinamobile.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 399 bytes --]
On Wed, Aug 11, 2021 at 07:55:23PM +0800, Tang Bin wrote:
> The function stm32_spdifrx_parse_of() is only called by the function
> stm32_spdifrx_probe(), and the probe function is only called with
> an openfirmware platform device. Therefore there is no need to check
> the device_node in probe function.
What is the benefit of not doing the check? It seems like reasonable
defensive programming.
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-08-11 11:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-08-11 11:55 [PATCH] ASoC: stm32: spdifrx: Delete unnecessary check in the probe function Tang Bin
2021-08-11 11:58 ` Mark Brown [this message]
2021-08-11 12:09 ` [PATCH] ASoC: stm32: spdifrx: Delete unnecessary check in theprobe function tangbin
2021-08-11 12:19 ` Mark Brown
2021-08-11 12:28 ` [PATCH] ASoC: stm32: spdifrx: Delete unnecessary check in the probe function tangbin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20210811115846.GC4167@sirena.org.uk \
--to=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com \
--cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com \
--cc=olivier.moysan@foss.st.com \
--cc=perex@perex.cz \
--cc=tangbin@cmss.chinamobile.com \
--cc=tiwai@suse.com \
--cc=zhangshengju@cmss.chinamobile.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).