linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/6] PM / OPP: restructure _of_init_opp_table

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 10 Aug 2015 12:23:37 -0700
From:	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
To:	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc:	Rafael Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net>, nm@...com,
	linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
	khilman@...aro.org,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
	open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] PM / OPP: restructure _of_init_opp_table_v2()

On 08/10, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> 'dev_opp' will always be NULL in _of_init_opp_table_v2() after creating
> OPPs for a device. There is no point comparing it against NULL there.
> 
> Restructure code a bit to make it more efficient.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>

Curious if these are a response to the static checker mails? If
so it would be good to add a reported-by tag.

> ---
>  drivers/base/power/opp.c | 21 ++++++++++-----------
>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/base/power/opp.c b/drivers/base/power/opp.c
> index 1daaa1a418a2..c9747fb192b1 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/power/opp.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/power/opp.c
> @@ -1295,20 +1295,19 @@ static int _of_init_opp_table_v2(struct device *dev,
>  	if (WARN_ON(!count))
>  		goto out;
>  
> -	if (!ret) {
> -		if (!dev_opp) {
> -			dev_opp = _find_device_opp(dev);
> -			if (WARN_ON(!dev_opp))
> -				goto out;
> -		}
> -
> -		dev_opp->np = opp_np;
> -		dev_opp->shared_opp = of_property_read_bool(opp_np,
> -							    "opp-shared");
> -	} else {
> +	if (ret) {
>  		of_free_opp_table(dev);
> +		goto out;
>  	}
>  
> +	dev_opp = _find_device_opp(dev);
> +	if (WARN_ON(!dev_opp))
> +		goto out;

Doesn't ret = 0 in this case? Why not drop the goto and just
return some error code. Same for the goto out up above.

-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/