All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: sudeep.holla@arm.com (Sudeep Holla)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 1/5] arm-cci: Rearrange code for splitting PMU vs driver code
Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2015 15:35:18 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <54F5D4B6.40409@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1425295754-13376-2-git-send-email-suzuki.poulose@arm.com>



On 02/03/15 11:29, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote:
> From: "Suzuki K. Poulose" <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
>
> No functional changes, only code re-arrangements for easier split of the
> PMU code vs low level driver code. Extracts the port handling code
> to cci_probe_ports().
>
> Signed-off-by: Suzuki K. Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
> ---
>   drivers/bus/arm-cci.c |  330 +++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------
>   1 file changed, 168 insertions(+), 162 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c b/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
> index 84fd660..f27cf56 100644
> --- a/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
> +++ b/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c

[...]

> @@ -1395,11 +1412,36 @@ static int cci_probe(void)
>   	sync_cache_w(&cpu_port);
>   	__sync_cache_range_w(ports, sizeof(*ports) * nb_cci_ports);
>   	pr_info("ARM CCI driver probed\n");
> +
>   	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int cci_probe(void)
> +{
> +	int ret;
> +	struct device_node *np;
> +	struct resource res;
> +
> +	np = of_find_matching_node(NULL, arm_cci_matches);
> +	if (!np)
> +		return -ENODEV;
>
> -memalloc_err:
> +	if (!of_device_is_available(np))
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +
> +	ret = of_address_to_resource(np, 0, &res);
> +	if (!ret) {
> +		cci_ctrl_base = ioremap(res.start, resource_size(&res));
> +		cci_ctrl_phys =	res.start;
> +	}
> +	if (ret || !cci_ctrl_base) {
> +		WARN(1, "unable to ioremap CCI ctrl\n");
> +		ret = -ENXIO;
> +		goto out;

IMO you can return directly here and get rid of this goto as nothing is
done there.

Regards,
Sudeep

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
To: "Suzuki K. Poulose" <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Cc: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
	"nico@linaro.org" <nico@linaro.org>,
	"b.zolnierkie@samsung.com" <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com>,
	"kgene@kernel.org" <kgene@kernel.org>,
	"a.kesavan@samsung.com" <a.kesavan@samsung.com>,
	"arnd@arndb.de" <arnd@arndb.de>,
	"devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Liviu Dudau <Liviu.Dudau@arm.com>,
	Lorenzo Pieralisi <Lorenzo.Pieralisi@arm.com>,
	Pawel Moll <Pawel.Moll@arm.com>,
	"olof@lixom.net" <olof@lixom.net>,
	Punit Agrawal <Punit.Agrawal@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@arm.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] arm-cci: Rearrange code for splitting PMU vs driver code
Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2015 15:35:18 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <54F5D4B6.40409@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1425295754-13376-2-git-send-email-suzuki.poulose@arm.com>



On 02/03/15 11:29, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote:
> From: "Suzuki K. Poulose" <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
>
> No functional changes, only code re-arrangements for easier split of the
> PMU code vs low level driver code. Extracts the port handling code
> to cci_probe_ports().
>
> Signed-off-by: Suzuki K. Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
> ---
>   drivers/bus/arm-cci.c |  330 +++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------
>   1 file changed, 168 insertions(+), 162 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c b/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
> index 84fd660..f27cf56 100644
> --- a/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
> +++ b/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c

[...]

> @@ -1395,11 +1412,36 @@ static int cci_probe(void)
>   	sync_cache_w(&cpu_port);
>   	__sync_cache_range_w(ports, sizeof(*ports) * nb_cci_ports);
>   	pr_info("ARM CCI driver probed\n");
> +
>   	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int cci_probe(void)
> +{
> +	int ret;
> +	struct device_node *np;
> +	struct resource res;
> +
> +	np = of_find_matching_node(NULL, arm_cci_matches);
> +	if (!np)
> +		return -ENODEV;
>
> -memalloc_err:
> +	if (!of_device_is_available(np))
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +
> +	ret = of_address_to_resource(np, 0, &res);
> +	if (!ret) {
> +		cci_ctrl_base = ioremap(res.start, resource_size(&res));
> +		cci_ctrl_phys =	res.start;
> +	}
> +	if (ret || !cci_ctrl_base) {
> +		WARN(1, "unable to ioremap CCI ctrl\n");
> +		ret = -ENXIO;
> +		goto out;

IMO you can return directly here and get rid of this goto as nothing is
done there.

Regards,
Sudeep

  reply	other threads:[~2015-03-03 15:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-03-02 11:29 [PATCH v2 0/5] arm-cci400: PMU monitoring support on ARM64 Suzuki K. Poulose
2015-03-02 11:29 ` Suzuki K. Poulose
2015-03-02 11:29 ` [PATCH 1/5] arm-cci: Rearrange code for splitting PMU vs driver code Suzuki K. Poulose
2015-03-02 11:29   ` Suzuki K. Poulose
2015-03-03 15:35   ` Sudeep Holla [this message]
2015-03-03 15:35     ` Sudeep Holla
2015-03-04 12:16     ` Suzuki K. Poulose
2015-03-04 12:16       ` Suzuki K. Poulose
2015-03-04 12:16       ` Suzuki K. Poulose
2015-03-02 11:29 ` [PATCH 2/5] arm-cci: Abstract the CCI400 PMU speicific definitions Suzuki K. Poulose
2015-03-02 11:29   ` Suzuki K. Poulose
2015-03-02 11:29 ` [PATCH 3/5] arm-cci: Get rid of secure transactions for PMU driver Suzuki K. Poulose
2015-03-02 11:29   ` Suzuki K. Poulose
2015-03-03 15:44   ` Sudeep Holla
2015-03-03 15:44     ` Sudeep Holla
2015-03-04 17:52     ` Suzuki K. Poulose
2015-03-04 17:52       ` Suzuki K. Poulose
2015-03-02 11:29 ` [PATCH 4/5] arm-cci: Split the code for PMU vs driver support Suzuki K. Poulose
2015-03-02 11:29   ` Suzuki K. Poulose
2015-03-03 15:53   ` Sudeep Holla
2015-03-03 15:53     ` Sudeep Holla
2015-03-03 15:53     ` Sudeep Holla
2015-03-04 12:18     ` Suzuki K. Poulose
2015-03-04 12:18       ` Suzuki K. Poulose
2015-03-02 11:29 ` [PATCH 5/5] arm-cci: Fix CCI PMU event validation Suzuki K. Poulose
2015-03-02 11:29   ` Suzuki K. Poulose
2015-03-02 11:29   ` Suzuki K. Poulose
2015-03-03 16:00 ` [PATCH v2 0/5] arm-cci400: PMU monitoring support on ARM64 Sudeep Holla
2015-03-03 16:00   ` Sudeep Holla
2015-03-03 16:00   ` Sudeep Holla
2015-03-04 12:17   ` Suzuki K. Poulose
2015-03-04 12:17     ` Suzuki K. Poulose
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2015-03-10 15:18 [PATCHv3 " Suzuki K. Poulose
2015-03-10 15:18 ` [PATCH 1/5] arm-cci: Rearrange code for splitting PMU vs driver code Suzuki K. Poulose
2015-03-10 15:18   ` Suzuki K. Poulose
2015-03-18 12:24 [PATCHv4 0/5] arm-cci400: PMU monitoring support on ARM64 Suzuki K. Poulose
2015-03-18 12:24 ` [PATCH 1/5] arm-cci: Rearrange code for splitting PMU vs driver code Suzuki K. Poulose

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=54F5D4B6.40409@arm.com \
    --to=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.