Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 7 Nov 2010 20:16:21 +0300 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/6 v2] ARM: Add basic architecture support for VIA/WonderMedia 85xx SoC's | From | Alexey Charkov <> |
| |
2010/11/7 Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>: > A couple of other points - sorry, should've been in the last mail. > > On Sun, Nov 07, 2010 at 07:28:52PM +0300, Alexey Charkov wrote: >> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-vt8500/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-vt8500/Kconfig >> new file mode 100644 >> index 0000000..e0c6268 >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-vt8500/Kconfig >> @@ -0,0 +1,65 @@ >> +if ARCH_VT8500 >> + >> +config VTWM_VERSION_VT8500 >> + bool >> + default n > > n is the default anyway, so specifying this is redundant. >
Great, I'll drop it then.
>> +void __init bv07_init(void) >> +{ >> +#ifdef CONFIG_FB_VT8500 >> + void __iomem *gpio_mux_reg = ioremap(wmt_current_regs->gpio >> + + 0x200, 4); > > ioremap() is generally regarded as a function which can fail, and therefore > needs its return value checked. There seems to be multiple instances of > this through this patch. >
Is it OK to simply skip the code that uses the relevant pointer if ioremap fails (possibly issuing an error via printk)? The problem is that these are void functions, so I can't just return -ENODEV on failure. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |