From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4B324C83F03 for ; Fri, 4 Jul 2025 15:13:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4bYcbH5Z35z3bNt; Sat, 5 Jul 2025 01:13:31 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip="2a07:de40:b251:101:10:150:64:1" ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=lists.ozlabs.org; s=201707; t=1751642011; cv=none; b=acrpg8OCSacfVQDxdQ9K1qlVY4Ym1/gc67rtgPt+kE7ffC18r9GRckAx+EatyT/tMBlhg1b8AMvYGaQ771CI7fLsYjNNcsy87mjUufYC49kNPK+KC9gxib+ln/0GUS+SkEke0wuorvQDkX9YXmUAdyOn/rAwf+6yySzH2vZB0h4PQTUHM8ELGw7o92g+OUWi6btcL4DdoigprvEJ1eL8LO5M+2yscWfxTcyt0MYTwaeudlFJ+gFhKjWvmf1W1gsF9aaEObbhefW+9eAFLBDaJ6QZ8Of+0swnGW/nVK6EAKnXWDxamXvjBpKJS4NmzgEqpcMKxS+QbRWsBw9JFcAAiw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=lists.ozlabs.org; s=201707; t=1751642011; c=relaxed/relaxed; bh=A2GjZktKM3Y5oURN46oUVqyGn4fu4vb+qYUJ6tUVUIg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=QzvC4gUnV6GMLt6AR175j/JPLiHrjD2I9GRRfSije5v2eBysEwwJQ3dg4wlj9tSaWOn8W31r52t+krgWTb++tpM3K30SNpDrxMCizTvtZ4qEmkF7817USMW1Aocn56D5TGllTZTRU5/kqrcGb3J7pacemhoeAe9isoND9bBupurSPF/ysUrCvzPjO6m8LPHDbiyFiwIVpNZcXQYaabiCpLV/+TjmqepHUl3WiayumMxf9I9YZ417YtVqP7kbz0CDkdDBORpkzXzgTsWYeGAN7S4XqnTQOpWmkQWHLUKEwzm6CDnV/GGwiOvdImGjC0azKcM16kykbD+4BgVr6puW7w== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.de; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=susede2_rsa header.b=v0j0caA5; dkim=pass header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.a=ed25519-sha256 header.s=susede2_ed25519 header.b=6ixN2WmS; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=susede2_rsa header.b=OevvFzsM; dkim=neutral header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.a=ed25519-sha256 header.s=susede2_ed25519 header.b=8mHhaZ3e; dkim-atps=neutral; spf=pass (client-ip=2a07:de40:b251:101:10:150:64:1; helo=smtp-out1.suse.de; envelope-from=jdelvare@suse.de; receiver=lists.ozlabs.org) smtp.mailfrom=suse.de Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.de Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=susede2_rsa header.b=v0j0caA5; dkim=pass header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.a=ed25519-sha256 header.s=susede2_ed25519 header.b=6ixN2WmS; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=susede2_rsa header.b=OevvFzsM; dkim=neutral header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.a=ed25519-sha256 header.s=susede2_ed25519 header.b=8mHhaZ3e; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=suse.de (client-ip=2a07:de40:b251:101:10:150:64:1; helo=smtp-out1.suse.de; envelope-from=jdelvare@suse.de; receiver=lists.ozlabs.org) X-Greylist: delayed 1827 seconds by postgrey-1.37 at boromir; Sat, 05 Jul 2025 01:13:30 AEST Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de (smtp-out1.suse.de [IPv6:2a07:de40:b251:101:10:150:64:1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4bYcbG3pfSz30hF for ; Sat, 5 Jul 2025 01:13:30 +1000 (AEST) Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (unknown [10.150.64.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 887122118A; Fri, 4 Jul 2025 15:13:25 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa; t=1751642007; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=A2GjZktKM3Y5oURN46oUVqyGn4fu4vb+qYUJ6tUVUIg=; b=v0j0caA56jDGssv5Dw0KOkj0Of8befju4gIY9xoDO2dNMWq8mOoH68eJN1KfxFr5NHnshe Gi67ZBpRhxLhIoF2bTeNb5RTz+J6KYzIM7PQG8xC5QIAE0VlEfac1yIVRnx+cowLiy4oEv qWQT0yj+ajvFNwVr+kQ36IGcVjw6xY4= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1751642007; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=A2GjZktKM3Y5oURN46oUVqyGn4fu4vb+qYUJ6tUVUIg=; b=6ixN2WmShkS92b8vQRjMfrrLWi7Av2QKz1rP65+A1JkFdYaexJaebZZdTDeh3XoeBlYCMu oRGEjvtTiyLxZLCg== Authentication-Results: smtp-out1.suse.de; none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa; t=1751642005; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=A2GjZktKM3Y5oURN46oUVqyGn4fu4vb+qYUJ6tUVUIg=; b=OevvFzsMb4OyUbujLhznaW5v43J0IVtrrqycIXCR/zSI48pxqxOQFqQojwuGk6ond2k+cF +eaf6DliMjnoBrYz8OPStmAaXvHYCWsYv0niuHW+ISOtx0lxnibFsSSGPI7hoM8jEXImKR 8xTBq2sMbK1jkATIey/XTTosTAQWDZ4= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1751642005; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=A2GjZktKM3Y5oURN46oUVqyGn4fu4vb+qYUJ6tUVUIg=; b=8mHhaZ3egnzHDBHtebzfnwFwxUIYEzAbbBz0tHN4++oHdIQWoF7ag5slwJ9SlloM4+a9ij pLu0WHpGNQ91chDA== Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1A76113757; Fri, 4 Jul 2025 15:13:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([2a07:de40:b281:106:10:150:64:167]) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org with ESMTPSA id qIpcBJXvZ2hrBgAAD6G6ig (envelope-from ); Fri, 04 Jul 2025 15:13:25 +0000 Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2025 17:13:15 +0200 From: Jean Delvare To: Andrew Jeffery Cc: linux-aspeed@lists.ozlabs.org, Joel Stanley , Henry Martin , Patrick Rudolph , Andrew Geissler , Ninad Palsule , Patrick Venture , Robert Lippert , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 09/10] soc: aspeed: lpc-snoop: Consolidate channel initialisation Message-ID: <20250704171315.30300f59@endymion> In-Reply-To: <20250616-aspeed-lpc-snoop-fixes-v2-9-3cdd59c934d3@codeconstruct.com.au> References: <20250616-aspeed-lpc-snoop-fixes-v2-0-3cdd59c934d3@codeconstruct.com.au> <20250616-aspeed-lpc-snoop-fixes-v2-9-3cdd59c934d3@codeconstruct.com.au> Organization: SUSE Linux X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.2.0 (GTK 3.24.43; x86_64-suse-linux-gnu) X-Mailing-List: linux-aspeed@lists.ozlabs.org List-Id: List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Archive: , List-Subscribe: , , List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-3.80 / 50.00]; BAYES_HAM(-3.00)[100.00%]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; MID_RHS_NOT_FQDN(0.50)[]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.20)[-1.000]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; FUZZY_RATELIMITED(0.00)[rspamd.com]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; HAS_ORG_HEADER(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_SEVEN(0.00)[11]; FREEMAIL_ENVRCPT(0.00)[gmail.com,yahoo.com]; DKIM_SIGNED(0.00)[suse.de:s=susede2_rsa,suse.de:s=susede2_ed25519]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_CC(0.00)[lists.ozlabs.org,jms.id.au,gmail.com,9elements.com,yahoo.com,linux.ibm.com,google.com,lists.infradead.org,vger.kernel.org]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; DBL_BLOCKED_OPENRESOLVER(0.00)[codeconstruct.com.au:email,imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org:helo,suse.de:email] Hi Andrew, On Mon, 16 Jun 2025 22:43:46 +0930, Andrew Jeffery wrote: > Previously, channel initialisation was a bit perilous with respect to > resource cleanup in error paths. While the implementation had issues, > it at least made an effort to eliminate some of its problems by first > testing whether any channels were enabled, and bailing out if not. > > Having improved the robustness of resource handling in probe() we can > now rearrange the initial channel test to be located with the subsequent > test, and rework the unrolled conditional logic to use a loop for an > improvement in readability. I like the idea, this indeed improves readability and would make it much easier to add support for more channels. Three suggestions inline below. > Signed-off-by: Andrew Jeffery > --- > drivers/soc/aspeed/aspeed-lpc-snoop.c | 51 +++++++++++++++++------------------ > 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/soc/aspeed/aspeed-lpc-snoop.c b/drivers/soc/aspeed/aspeed-lpc-snoop.c > index 8dbc9d4158b89f23bda340f060d205a29bbb43c3..9f88c5471b1b6d85f6d9e1970240f3d1904d166c 100644 > --- a/drivers/soc/aspeed/aspeed-lpc-snoop.c > +++ b/drivers/soc/aspeed/aspeed-lpc-snoop.c > @@ -294,12 +294,21 @@ static void aspeed_lpc_disable_snoop(struct aspeed_lpc_snoop *lpc_snoop, > kfifo_free(&channel->fifo); > } > > +static void aspeed_lpc_snoop_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) > +{ > + struct aspeed_lpc_snoop *lpc_snoop = dev_get_drvdata(&pdev->dev); > + > + /* Disable both snoop channels */ > + aspeed_lpc_disable_snoop(lpc_snoop, ASPEED_LPC_SNOOP_INDEX_0); > + aspeed_lpc_disable_snoop(lpc_snoop, ASPEED_LPC_SNOOP_INDEX_1); For consistency with the probe function, I think it would make sense to use a for loop here as well, instead of hard-coding the channel number to 2. That way, no change will be needed if a future device supports more than 2 channels. > +} > + > static int aspeed_lpc_snoop_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > { > struct aspeed_lpc_snoop *lpc_snoop; > - struct device *dev; > struct device_node *np; > - u32 port; > + struct device *dev; > + int idx; > int rc; > > dev = &pdev->dev; > @@ -322,12 +331,6 @@ static int aspeed_lpc_snoop_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > > dev_set_drvdata(&pdev->dev, lpc_snoop); > > - rc = of_property_read_u32_index(dev->of_node, "snoop-ports", 0, &port); > - if (rc) { > - dev_err(dev, "no snoop ports configured\n"); > - return -ENODEV; > - } > - > lpc_snoop->clk = devm_clk_get_enabled(dev, NULL); > if (IS_ERR(lpc_snoop->clk)) > return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(lpc_snoop->clk), "couldn't get clock"); > @@ -336,30 +339,24 @@ static int aspeed_lpc_snoop_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > if (rc) > return rc; > > - rc = aspeed_lpc_enable_snoop(lpc_snoop, dev, ASPEED_LPC_SNOOP_INDEX_0, port); > - if (rc) > - return rc; > + for (idx = ASPEED_LPC_SNOOP_INDEX_0; idx <= ASPEED_LPC_SNOOP_INDEX_MAX; idx++) { > + u32 port; > > - /* Configuration of 2nd snoop channel port is optional */ > - if (of_property_read_u32_index(dev->of_node, "snoop-ports", > - 1, &port) == 0) { > - rc = aspeed_lpc_enable_snoop(lpc_snoop, dev, ASPEED_LPC_SNOOP_INDEX_1, port); > - if (rc) { > - aspeed_lpc_disable_snoop(lpc_snoop, ASPEED_LPC_SNOOP_INDEX_0); > - return rc; > - } > + rc = of_property_read_u32_index(dev->of_node, "snoop-ports", idx, &port); > + if (rc) > + break; > + > + rc = aspeed_lpc_enable_snoop(lpc_snoop, dev, idx, port); > + if (rc) > + goto cleanup_channels; > } > > - return 0; > -} > + return idx == ASPEED_LPC_SNOOP_INDEX_0 ? -ENODEV : 0; The driver used to log an error message when returning -NODEV: "no snoop ports configured". Maybe you could call dev_err_probe() here? It might also be a good idea to add a comment stating that only the first channel is mandatory, to explain why the ASPEED_LPC_SNOOP_INDEX_0 case is handled differently (there used to be a comment /* Configuration of 2nd snoop channel port is optional */ serving that purpose). > > -static void aspeed_lpc_snoop_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) > -{ > - struct aspeed_lpc_snoop *lpc_snoop = dev_get_drvdata(&pdev->dev); > +cleanup_channels: > + aspeed_lpc_snoop_remove(pdev); > > - /* Disable both snoop channels */ > - aspeed_lpc_disable_snoop(lpc_snoop, ASPEED_LPC_SNOOP_INDEX_0); > - aspeed_lpc_disable_snoop(lpc_snoop, ASPEED_LPC_SNOOP_INDEX_1); > + return rc; > } > > static const struct aspeed_lpc_snoop_model_data ast2400_model_data = { > None if this is blocking though, so: Acked-by: Jean Delvare -- Jean Delvare SUSE L3 Support