mbox series

[0/3] pinctrl: ti: ti-iodelay: Fix some error handling paths + 2 unrelated clean-ups

Message ID cover.1720556038.git.christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr
Headers show
Series pinctrl: ti: ti-iodelay: Fix some error handling paths + 2 unrelated clean-ups | expand

Message

Christophe JAILLET July 9, 2024, 8:37 p.m. UTC 
The first patch is completly speculative. It is based on static analysis
when a function is called in the remove() function, but not in the
error handling path of the probe.
When looking deeper at it, it seems that part of
ti_iodelay_pinconf_init_dev() also needed to be fixed.

/!\ This is completly speculative. So review with care /!\


Patch 2 and 3 are just constification patches spoted while looking at
the code.

Christophe JAILLET (3):
  pinctrl: ti: ti-iodelay: Fix some error handling paths
  pinctrl: ti: ti-iodelay: Constify struct ti_iodelay_reg_data
  pinctrl: ti: ti-iodelay: Constify struct regmap_config

 drivers/pinctrl/ti/pinctrl-ti-iodelay.c | 58 ++++++++++---------------
 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)

Comments

Linus Walleij Aug. 5, 2024, 7:23 a.m. UTC | #1 
On Tue, Jul 9, 2024 at 10:37 PM Christophe JAILLET
<christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr> wrote:

> The first patch is completly speculative. It is based on static analysis
> when a function is called in the remove() function, but not in the
> error handling path of the probe.
> When looking deeper at it, it seems that part of
> ti_iodelay_pinconf_init_dev() also needed to be fixed.
>
> /!\ This is completly speculative. So review with care /!\
>
>
> Patch 2 and 3 are just constification patches spoted while looking at
> the code.
>
> Christophe JAILLET (3):
>   pinctrl: ti: ti-iodelay: Fix some error handling paths
>   pinctrl: ti: ti-iodelay: Constify struct ti_iodelay_reg_data
>   pinctrl: ti: ti-iodelay: Constify struct regmap_config

Patches 1 & 2 applied, patch 3 was already contributed by
another developer.

Yours,
Linus Walleij