Re: [PATCH] usb: phy: samsung: Introducing usb phy driver for hsotg

On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 08:13:01PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:

On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 08:00:00PM +0900, Kukjin Kim wrote:

quoted

quoted

+static int samsung_usbphy_get_refclk_freq(struct samsung_usbphy *sphy)
+{
+	struct clk *ref_clk;
+	int refclk_freq = 0;
+
+	ref_clk = clk_get(sphy->dev, "xusbxti");
+	if (IS_ERR(ref_clk)) {

IS_ERR_OR_NULL(ref_clk)?

For the N'th time, NO.  IS_ERR is correct here.

quoted

quoted

+		dev_err(sphy->dev, "Failed to get reference clock\n");
+		return PTR_ERR(ref_clk);

Look, it's the ABI.  Not only that but it's also TOTALLY AND UTTERLY WRONG
to use IS_ERR_OR_NULL(foo) and then follow it with return PTR_ERR(foo).
You end up returning ZERO.

Stop telling people to use IS_ERR_OR_NULL without properly thinking about
it first.  Virtually every single one of these done this way is a BUG.

Are we clear on this?

Wouldn't be much easier to define PTR_ERR() to return -Esomething when
its argument is NULL?

This would end the whole issue of "should I use IS_ERR*/PTR_ERR or look into
the pointer myself?" story.  One could simply always use IS_ERR*/PTR_ERR
and have the right thing done in whatever case.

Regards,
Domenico