* Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 03/14/2012 09:56 AM, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > This patch adds helpers to support device tree bindings for the generic
> > PWM API. Device tree binding documentation for PWM controllers is also
> > provided.
> ...
> > +static struct pwm_device *of_pwm_simple_xlate(struct pwm_chip *pc,
> > +                                         const struct of_phandle_args 
> > *args)
> ...
> > +   if (args->args_count < pc->of_pwm_n_cells)
> > +           return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
> 
> I think you can drop that error-check given the code quoted below?
> 
> (and if not, shouldn't it be != not >= ?)
> 
> > +struct pwm_device *of_pwm_request(struct device_node *np,
> > +                             const char *propname, int index)
> ...
> > +   if (args.args_count != pc->of_pwm_n_cells) {
> > +           pr_debug("%s: wrong #pwm-cells for %s\n", np->full_name,
> > +                    args.np->full_name);
> > +           pwm = ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
> > +           goto put;
> > +   }
> > +
> > +   pwm = pc->of_xlate(pc, &args);

Yes, you're right. It is completely redundant.

Thierry

Attachment: pgpRhqdou7xTI.pgp
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
devicetree-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss

Reply via email to