From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (frasgout.his.huawei.com [185.176.79.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7DA0A1B8E94; Wed, 14 Aug 2024 16:38:45 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.176.79.56 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1723653528; cv=none; b=JK79yAHbfEsZXWmsTbDNr0P/CgEbTNHZXjDjxJAwz541cRiZmo0eAKSnoRbZ9efp7Mr7U/RVoPM/pMQO6WDLfuLJ6MMulSNAe9+UPuJPv8U02FpES24g69k7kxoGYA0pLJ6XdALYsgUvVxKmMicsDxb+zlVI9CT1bErSjkGX0DI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1723653528; c=relaxed/simple; bh=CO8qOzi03Ld/YkeV8tQJ54g2seyyF0fq96e3Yln3LZ8=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=csXVI6rocq17FQHTy+SncvtFKrXvqOcRKhDzA8SirK0y08t5EknXFptm8mTa+UCKeI5C/AWUCx/33qBI2eygZ8oqPyKtq667vgvLh83dpNJqGJP9j569luQPmfN7SAAELjpD3QKmzySsGIXIwlbCzmG9UDhj22GeEyCcKqLJxeM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=Huawei.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.176.79.56 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=Huawei.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.18.186.216]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4WkYlC4h9Mz6K6D2; Thu, 15 Aug 2024 00:35:19 +0800 (CST) Received: from lhrpeml500005.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.191.163.240]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3B165140C98; Thu, 15 Aug 2024 00:38:36 +0800 (CST) Received: from localhost (10.203.177.66) by lhrpeml500005.china.huawei.com (7.191.163.240) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.1.2507.39; Wed, 14 Aug 2024 17:38:35 +0100 Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2024 17:38:34 +0100 From: Jonathan Cameron To: Krzysztof Kozlowski CC: Krzysztof Kozlowski , Nicolas Ferre , Alexandre Belloni , Claudiu Beznea , Lukasz Luba , Alim Akhtar , Maxime Coquelin , Alexandre Torgue , Thierry Reding , Jonathan Hunter , Santosh Shilimkar , , , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] memory: atmel-ebi: use scoped device node handling to simplify error paths Message-ID: <20240814173834.000002c8@Huawei.com> In-Reply-To: <20240812-cleanup-h-of-node-put-memory-v1-1-5065a8f361d2@linaro.org> References: <20240812-cleanup-h-of-node-put-memory-v1-0-5065a8f361d2@linaro.org> <20240812-cleanup-h-of-node-put-memory-v1-1-5065a8f361d2@linaro.org> Organization: Huawei Technologies Research and Development (UK) Ltd. X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.1.0 (GTK 3.24.33; x86_64-w64-mingw32) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ClientProxiedBy: lhrpeml100003.china.huawei.com (7.191.160.210) To lhrpeml500005.china.huawei.com (7.191.163.240) On Mon, 12 Aug 2024 15:33:55 +0200 Krzysztof Kozlowski 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 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 > */ > > +#include > #include > #include > #include > @@ -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) >