Re: [PATCH v3] extcon: palmas: hide error messages if gpio returns -EPROBE_DEFER

[Chanwoo Choi]

On 2/17/20 10:58 PM, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> 
>> Am 17.02.2020 um 14:38 schrieb H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>>
>> If the gpios are probed after this driver (e.g. if they
>> come from an i2c expander) there is no need to print an
>> error message.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/extcon/extcon-palmas.c | 8 ++++++--
>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/extcon/extcon-palmas.c b/drivers/extcon/extcon-palmas.c
>> index edc5016f46f1..cea58d0cb457 100644
>> --- a/drivers/extcon/extcon-palmas.c
>> +++ b/drivers/extcon/extcon-palmas.c
>> @@ -205,14 +205,18 @@ static int palmas_usb_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>
>> 	palmas_usb->id_gpiod = devm_gpiod_get_optional(&pdev->dev, "id",
>> 							GPIOD_IN);
>> -	if (IS_ERR(palmas_usb->id_gpiod)) {
>> +	if (PTR_ERR(palmas_usb->id_gpiod) == -EPROBE_DEFER) {
>> +		return -EPROBE_DEFER;
>> +	} else if (IS_ERR(palmas_usb->id_gpiod)) {
> 
> Hm.
> 
> While looking again at that: why do we need the "{" and "} else "?
> 
> It should be sufficient to have
> 
>> 	palmas_usb->id_gpiod = devm_gpiod_get_optional(&pdev->dev, "id",
>> 							GPIOD_IN);
>> +	if (PTR_ERR(palmas_usb->id_gpiod) == -EPROBE_DEFER)
>> +		return -EPROBE_DEFER;
>> 	if (IS_ERR(palmas_usb->id_gpiod)) {
> 
> What do you think is better coding style here?

I think that my suggestion is better because 'if' and 'else if'
check the error state of same 'palmas_usb->id_gpiod' variable.

If 'if' and 'else if' checks the different variable,
your suggestion is better.


-- 
Best Regards,
Chanwoo Choi
Samsung Electronics