linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
Cc: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>,
	linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org,
	Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com>,
	linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
	Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@foss.st.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>,
	Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@tuxon.dev>,
	Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@samsung.com>,
	Santosh Shilimkar <ssantosh@kernel.org>,
	linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org,
	Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>,
	linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com,
	Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] memory: atmel-ebi: use scoped device node handling to simplify error paths
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2024 17:38:34 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240814173834.000002c8@Huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240812-cleanup-h-of-node-put-memory-v1-1-5065a8f361d2@linaro.org>

On Mon, 12 Aug 2024 15:33:55 +0200
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:

> Obtain the device node reference with scoped/cleanup.h to reduce error
> handling and make the code a bit simpler.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>

Hi,

Comments inline.
> ---
>  drivers/memory/atmel-ebi.c | 29 ++++++++++-------------------
>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/memory/atmel-ebi.c b/drivers/memory/atmel-ebi.c
> index e8bb5f37f5cb..fcbfc2655d8d 100644
> --- a/drivers/memory/atmel-ebi.c
> +++ b/drivers/memory/atmel-ebi.c
> @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
>   * Copyright (C) 2013 Jean-Jacques Hiblot <jjhiblot@traphandler.com>
>   */
>  
> +#include <linux/cleanup.h>
>  #include <linux/clk.h>
>  #include <linux/io.h>
>  #include <linux/mfd/syscon.h>
> @@ -517,7 +518,7 @@ static int atmel_ebi_dev_disable(struct atmel_ebi *ebi, struct device_node *np)
>  static int atmel_ebi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  {
>  	struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> -	struct device_node *child, *np = dev->of_node, *smc_np;
> +	struct device_node *child, *np = dev->of_node;
>  	struct atmel_ebi *ebi;
>  	int ret, reg_cells;
>  	struct clk *clk;
> @@ -541,30 +542,24 @@ static int atmel_ebi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  
>  	ebi->clk = clk;
>  
> -	smc_np = of_parse_phandle(dev->of_node, "atmel,smc", 0);
> +	struct device_node *smc_np __free(device_node) = of_parse_phandle(dev->of_node,
> +									  "atmel,smc", 0);
Trivial:
I'd line break this as
> +	struct device_node *smc_np __free(device_node) =
		of_parse_phandle(dev->of_node, "atmel,smc", 0);

>  
>  	ebi->smc.regmap = syscon_node_to_regmap(smc_np);
> -	if (IS_ERR(ebi->smc.regmap)) {
> -		ret = PTR_ERR(ebi->smc.regmap);
> -		goto put_node;
> -	}
> +	if (IS_ERR(ebi->smc.regmap))
> +		return PTR_ERR(ebi->smc.regmap);
>  
>  	ebi->smc.layout = atmel_hsmc_get_reg_layout(smc_np);
> -	if (IS_ERR(ebi->smc.layout)) {
> -		ret = PTR_ERR(ebi->smc.layout);
> -		goto put_node;
> -	}
> +	if (IS_ERR(ebi->smc.layout))
> +		return PTR_ERR(ebi->smc.layout);
>  
>  	ebi->smc.clk = of_clk_get(smc_np, 0);
>  	if (IS_ERR(ebi->smc.clk)) {
> -		if (PTR_ERR(ebi->smc.clk) != -ENOENT) {
> -			ret = PTR_ERR(ebi->smc.clk);
> -			goto put_node;
> -		}
> +		if (PTR_ERR(ebi->smc.clk) != -ENOENT)
> +			return PTR_ERR(ebi->smc.clk);
>  
>  		ebi->smc.clk = NULL;
>  	}
> -	of_node_put(smc_np);

The large change in scope is a bit inelegant as it now hangs on to
the smc_np much longer than before.

Maybe it's worth pulling out the modified code as a 
atem_eb_probe_smc(struct device_node *smc_np, struct atmel_ebi_smc *smc )

or something like with a struct_group to define the atmel_ebi_smc

That would keep the tight scope for the data and generally simplify it
a bit.

>  	ret = clk_prepare_enable(ebi->smc.clk);
>  	if (ret)
>  		return ret;
> @@ -615,10 +610,6 @@ static int atmel_ebi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  	}
>  
>  	return of_platform_populate(np, NULL, NULL, dev);
> -
> -put_node:
> -	of_node_put(smc_np);
> -	return ret;
>  }
>  
>  static __maybe_unused int atmel_ebi_resume(struct device *dev)
> 



  reply	other threads:[~2024-08-14 16:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-08-12 13:33 [PATCH 0/9] memory: simplify with scoped/cleanup.h for device nodes Krzysztof Kozlowski
2024-08-12 13:33 ` [PATCH 1/9] memory: atmel-ebi: use scoped device node handling to simplify error paths Krzysztof Kozlowski
2024-08-14 16:38   ` Jonathan Cameron [this message]
2024-08-14 17:56     ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2024-08-12 13:33 ` [PATCH 2/9] memory: atmel-ebi: simplify with scoped for each OF child loop Krzysztof Kozlowski
2024-08-14 16:39   ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-08-12 13:33 ` [PATCH 3/9] memory: samsung: exynos5422-dmc: use scoped device node handling to simplify error paths Krzysztof Kozlowski
2024-08-14 16:42   ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-08-14 17:57     ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2024-08-12 13:33 ` [PATCH 4/9] memory: stm32-fmc2-ebi: simplify with scoped for each OF child loop Krzysztof Kozlowski
2024-08-14 16:45   ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-08-14 17:59     ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2024-08-12 13:33 ` [PATCH 5/9] memory: tegra-mc: " Krzysztof Kozlowski
2024-08-14 16:50   ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-08-12 13:34 ` [PATCH 6/9] memory: tegra124-emc: " Krzysztof Kozlowski
2024-08-14 16:51   ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-08-12 13:34 ` [PATCH 7/9] memory: tegra20-emc: " Krzysztof Kozlowski
2024-08-14 16:52   ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-08-12 13:34 ` [PATCH 8/9] memory: tegra30-emc: " Krzysztof Kozlowski
2024-08-12 13:34 ` [PATCH 9/9] memory: ti-aemif: " Krzysztof Kozlowski
2024-08-14 16:55   ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-08-14 18:01     ` Krzysztof Kozlowski

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=20240814173834.000002c8@Huawei.com \
    --to=jonathan.cameron@huawei.com \
    --cc=alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com \
    --cc=alexandre.torgue@foss.st.com \
    --cc=alim.akhtar@samsung.com \
    --cc=claudiu.beznea@tuxon.dev \
    --cc=jonathanh@nvidia.com \
    --cc=krzk@kernel.org \
    --cc=krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com \
    --cc=linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lukasz.luba@arm.com \
    --cc=mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com \
    --cc=ssantosh@kernel.org \
    --cc=thierry.reding@gmail.com \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).