drivers: pci: controller: pcie-rockchip: Use dev_err_probe()

Commit Message

[e-mail] April 3, 2025, 7:43 a.m. UTC

From: Zhang Enpei <[e-mail]>

Replace the open-code with dev_err_probe() to simplify the code.

Signed-off-by: Zhang Enpei <[e-mail]>
Signed-off-by: Shao Mingyin <[e-mail]>
---
 drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip.c | 9 +++------
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

Comments

Krzysztof Kozlowski April 4, 2025, 6:09 a.m. UTC | #1

On 03/04/2025 09:43, [e-mail] wrote:
> From: Zhang Enpei <[e-mail]>
> 
> Replace the open-code with dev_err_probe() to simplify the code.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Zhang Enpei <[e-mail]>
> Signed-off-by: Shao Mingyin <[e-mail]>
> ---
Considering zte is sending untested patches from poor automation (or AI
generated), this might be correct or might not be because it does not
look like probe path.

Anyway, don't send patch by patch and line by line. Why you did not
decide to fix all of the places in these drivers?

NAK

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Patch

diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip.c b/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip.c
index 0f88da378805..9897824a81f8 100644
--- a/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip.c
+++ b/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip.c
@@ -230,12 +230,9 @@  int rockchip_pcie_get_phys(struct rockchip_pcie *rockchip)
 		phy = devm_of_phy_get(dev, dev->of_node, name);
 		kfree(name);

-		if (IS_ERR(phy)) {
-			if (PTR_ERR(phy) != -EPROBE_DEFER)
-				dev_err(dev, "missing phy for lane %d: %ld\n",
-					i, PTR_ERR(phy));
-			return PTR_ERR(phy);
-		}
+		if (IS_ERR(phy))
+			return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(phy),
+					     "missing phy for lane %d\n", i);

 		rockchip->phys[i] = phy;
 	}