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 AEB5A1465AC; Tue, 27 Aug 2024 09:59:31 +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=1724752774; cv=none; b=vFXPjFDiqQ/xYxZyj/3XUQGogYEjCXgCFryLVpEIEPVGbYFOk+HVXuYUxZUGQacSBlLNP2MEc67SOpdmHjDkv0fDD8/gIqK/QcofWy+EiIhYBR19k6vyadGT+mtrAjBqb071HUMD49MustmPAYlbxlNV5WKSyihglsIvJbnk3kM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1724752774; c=relaxed/simple; bh=rtdaZNORUcVPjsi7s+VtSTMyfcWESUFzfJ5Zzi7PG3k=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=aIXJUacdVrnM9oCd5vKpmheVSYpinyG/HK5d0HieNSz7mKKBACMMC5ySUyRcv6A8GKv+P0ym6OkUIlRnt6snV2Ogy/eCUBzTkmcNaLsZuwVkgGpGiyAKkT3Dn3/B/KHh6mLc7jDIA9jY8V1oJqXLO40Zc8Gcnre4R/QrMP8WKVs= 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 4WtNFv32sdz6J6xg; Tue, 27 Aug 2024 17:55:31 +0800 (CST) Received: from lhrpeml500005.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.191.163.240]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3BCCF140447; Tue, 27 Aug 2024 17:59:29 +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; Tue, 27 Aug 2024 10:59:28 +0100 Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2024 10:59:27 +0100 From: Jonathan Cameron To: Krzysztof Kozlowski CC: Ulf Hansson , Heiko Stuebner , Shawn Guo , Sascha Hauer , Pengutronix Kernel Team , Fabio Estevam , Bjorn Andersson , Konrad Dybcio , Geert Uytterhoeven , Magnus Damm , , , , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/10] pmdomain: rockchip: Simplify locking with guard() Message-ID: <20240827105927.00007ac7@Huawei.com> In-Reply-To: <20240823-cleanup-h-guard-pm-domain-v1-2-8320722eaf39@linaro.org> References: <20240823-cleanup-h-guard-pm-domain-v1-0-8320722eaf39@linaro.org> <20240823-cleanup-h-guard-pm-domain-v1-2-8320722eaf39@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-kernel@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 Fri, 23 Aug 2024 14:51:06 +0200 Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > Simplify error handling (smaller error handling) over locks with > guard(). > > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski Musing inline. LGTM Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron > --- > drivers/pmdomain/rockchip/pm-domains.c | 5 +---- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/pmdomain/rockchip/pm-domains.c b/drivers/pmdomain/rockchip/pm-domains.c > index 5679ad336a11..538dde58d924 100644 > --- a/drivers/pmdomain/rockchip/pm-domains.c > +++ b/drivers/pmdomain/rockchip/pm-domains.c > @@ -910,7 +910,7 @@ static int rockchip_pm_domain_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > * Prevent any rockchip_pmu_block() from racing with the remainder of > * setup (clocks, register initialization). > */ > - mutex_lock(&dmc_pmu_mutex); > + guard(mutex)(&dmc_pmu_mutex); > > for_each_available_child_of_node_scoped(np, node) { > error = rockchip_pm_add_one_domain(pmu, node); > @@ -943,13 +943,10 @@ static int rockchip_pm_domain_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > if (!WARN_ON_ONCE(dmc_pmu)) > dmc_pmu = pmu; > > - mutex_unlock(&dmc_pmu_mutex); > - > return 0; > > err_out: > rockchip_pm_domain_cleanup(pmu); I wonder. Could you use a devm_add_action_or_reset for this and allow early returns throughout? Would need to take the lock again perhaps and I haven't checked if there is any issue in dropping and retaking the mutex however. The block logic is non obvious so I couldn't quickly figure this out. > - mutex_unlock(&dmc_pmu_mutex); > return error; > } > >