[PATCH -next] spi: microchip-core: Clean up redundant dev_err_probe()

[chenjiahao (C)]

On 2023/7/27 21:34, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 09:00:49PM +0800, Chen Jiahao wrote:
>> Refering to platform_get_irq()'s definition, the return value has
>> already been checked if ret < 0, and printed via dev_err_probe().
>> Calling dev_err_probe() one more time outside platform_get_irq()
>> is obviously redundant.
>>
>> Furthermore, platform_get_irq() will never return irq equals 0,
>> removing spi->irq == 0 checking to clean it up.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Chen Jiahao <chenjiahao16 at huawei.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/spi/spi-microchip-core.c | 6 ++----
>>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-microchip-core.c b/drivers/spi/spi-microchip-core.c
>> index b59e8a0c5b97..ac3b7b163db4 100644
>> --- a/drivers/spi/spi-microchip-core.c
>> +++ b/drivers/spi/spi-microchip-core.c
>> @@ -530,10 +530,8 @@ static int mchp_corespi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>   		return PTR_ERR(spi->regs);
>>   
>>   	spi->irq = platform_get_irq(pdev, 0);
>> -	if (spi->irq <= 0)
>> -		return dev_err_probe(&pdev->dev, -ENXIO,
>> -				     "invalid IRQ %d for SPI controller\n",
>> -				     spi->irq);
>> +	if (spi->irq < 0)
>> +		return -ENXIO;
> platform_get_irq() returns an ERRNO that can now be propagated since
> the special case for 0 no longer requires handling, no?

Sure, you are right. Here we should directly return the ERRNO passed
from platform_get_irq(), since platform_get_irq() has performed all
error checking inside.

Thanks for reminding.

Jiahao

>
>>   
>>   	ret = devm_request_irq(&pdev->dev, spi->irq, mchp_corespi_interrupt,
>>   			       IRQF_SHARED, dev_name(&pdev->dev), master);
>> -- 
>> 2.34.1
>>