On 2020/08/18 1:39, Rob Herring wrote:

On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 4:25 AM Kunihiko Hayashi
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Even if phy driver doesn't probe, the error message can't be distinguished
from other errors. This displays error message caused by the phy driver
explicitly.

Signed-off-by: Kunihiko Hayashi <hayashi.kunihiko@socionext.com>
---
  drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-uniphier.c | 8 ++++++--
  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-uniphier.c b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-uniphier.c
index 93ef608..7c8721e 100644
--- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-uniphier.c
+++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-uniphier.c

@@ -489,8 +489,12 @@ static int uniphier_pcie_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
                 return PTR_ERR(priv->rst);

         priv->phy = devm_phy_optional_get(dev, "pcie-phy");

The point of the optional variant vs. devm_phy_get() is whether or not
you get an error message. So shouldn't you switch to devm_phy_get
instead?

quoted

-       if (IS_ERR(priv->phy))
-               return PTR_ERR(priv->phy);
+       if (IS_ERR(priv->phy)) {
+               ret = PTR_ERR(priv->phy);
+               if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER)
+                       dev_err(dev, "Failed to get phy (%d)\n", ret);
+               return ret;
+       }

The 'phys' property is optional, so if there isn't 'phys' in the PCIe node,
devm_phy_get() returns -ENODEV, and devm_phy_optional_get() returns NULL.

When devm_phy_optional_get() replaces devm_phy_get(),
condition for displaying an error message changes to:

    (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER && ret != -ENODEV)

This won't be simple, but should it be replaced?

Thank you,

---
Best Regards
Kunihiko Hayashi

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel