From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754170Ab3HBQju (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Aug 2013 12:39:50 -0400 Received: from mail.active-venture.com ([67.228.131.205]:58223 "EHLO mail.active-venture.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753180Ab3HBQjs (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Aug 2013 12:39:48 -0400 X-Originating-IP: 108.223.40.66 Message-ID: <51FBE0D5.3070007@roeck-us.net> Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2013 09:39:49 -0700 From: Guenter Roeck User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130623 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Rutland CC: Jonas Jensen , "linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org" , "arnd@arndb.de" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "wim@iguana.be" , "arm@kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH v7] watchdog: Add MOXA ART watchdog driver References: <1375098093-8975-1-git-send-email-jonas.jensen@gmail.com> <1375101228-10930-1-git-send-email-jonas.jensen@gmail.com> <20130802114159.GK2884@e106331-lin.cambridge.arm.com> In-Reply-To: <20130802114159.GK2884@e106331-lin.cambridge.arm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 08/02/2013 04:41 AM, Mark Rutland wrote: > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 01:33:48PM +0100, Jonas Jensen wrote: >> Add watchdog driver for MOXA ART SoCs. >> [ ... ] >> + >> + err = watchdog_register_device(&moxart_wdt->dev); >> + if (unlikely(err)) >> + return err; > > This is a probe path. Is the use of unlikely() really appropriate here? > I suspect it doesn't make any appreciable difference, and should go. > Just wondering, for my education - why ? Is there s rule that unlikely() shall not be used in the probe path ? If so, I would like to know it and its reasoning to be able to apply it to my own reviews. Thanks, Guenter