Hi,
On Thu, Aug 06, 2026 at 05:17:45PM +0100, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
On 26/07/2026 15:55, Jason Yang via B4 Relay wrote:
quoted
static int samsung_mipi_dcphy_power_on(struct phy *phy)
{
struct samsung_mipi_dcphy *samsung = phy_get_drvdata(phy);@@ -1368,7 +1376,7 @@ static int samsung_mipi_dcphy_power_on(struct phy *phy)
switch (samsung->type) {
case PHY_TYPE_DPHY:
- return samsung_mipi_dphy_power_on(samsung);
+ return samsung_mipi_dphy_tx_power_on(samsung);
default:
/* CPHY part to be implemented later */
return -EOPNOTSUPP;@@ -1383,16 +1391,11 @@ static int samsung_mipi_dcphy_power_off(struct phy *phy)
switch (samsung->type) {
case PHY_TYPE_DPHY:
- samsung_mipi_dphy_lane_disable(samsung);
- break;
+ return samsung_mipi_dphy_tx_power_off(samsung);
default:
/* CPHY part to be implemented later */
return -EOPNOTSUPP;
}
-
- samsung_mipi_dcphy_pll_disable(samsung);
-
- return 0;
}
This looks a bit funny.
Do you have an int method() {} with a final path that returns no value ?
Tooling/compilers will definitely and rightly complain about that.
int function() {
...
switch(foo) {
case 42:
return 1;
default:
return 0;
}
/* cannot be reached */
}
Greetings,
-- Sebastian