| Message ID | 3608f46110fb5b66e4e94f18a9af3283d4149fe8.1439794825.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On 17-08-15, 13:06, Mark Brown wrote: > On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 12:30:58PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > Use IS_ERR_OR_NULL() rather than open coding it. > > Neither of the patches you sent today applied cleanly against current > code, please submit patches against the tree they're intended to be > applied on. That's the last I wanted to get ranted about, Sigh. I thought, my base is the latest linux-next/master, which will have your latest updates. But that wasn't the case. I was sitting on a slightly older base. Sorry about that. Will base out of your tree directly in future.
On 20-08-15, 15:26, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > The use of IS_ERR_OR_NULL is almost always a bug (as is the open-coded > equivalent). > Please try to find out why this is done here and add a comment > if it's actually correct, or fix it if not. > > My guess is that it is not ok to pass an error pointer as the argument > of _regulator_put(), so maybe there should be WARN_ON()? I agree, but updating that would require a revisit of all the API users, in case they are passing a possible error value to it. I am fine at attempting to fix that, but would need an Ack from Mark first.
diff --git a/drivers/regulator/core.c b/drivers/regulator/core.c index 78387a6cbae5..55b49acfd9b3 100644 --- a/drivers/regulator/core.c +++ b/drivers/regulator/core.c @@ -1595,7 +1595,7 @@ static void _regulator_put(struct regulator *regulator) { struct regulator_dev *rdev; - if (regulator == NULL || IS_ERR(regulator)) + if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(regulator)) return; rdev = regulator->rdev;
Use IS_ERR_OR_NULL() rather than open coding it. Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> --- drivers/regulator/core.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)