linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 09/12] i2c: tegra: Clean up probe function

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]

Message-ID: <85cc4e0c-e085-18a1-7cb5-a24b653cbb86@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 3 Sep 2020 00:47:12 +0300
From:   Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>
To:     Michał Mirosław <mirq-linux@...e.qmqm.pl>
Cc:     Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
        Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
        Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>,
        Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 09/12] i2c: tegra: Clean up probe function

03.09.2020 00:17, Dmitry Osipenko пишет:
> 03.09.2020 00:06, Michał Mirosław пишет:
>> On Mon, Aug 31, 2020 at 11:23:00PM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>>> The driver's probe function code is difficult to read and follow. This
>>> patch splits probe function into several logical parts that are easy to
>>> work with.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-tegra.c | 398 ++++++++++++++++++++-------------
>>>  1 file changed, 240 insertions(+), 158 deletions(-)
>> [...]
>>
>> I can see why you want to extract clock setup and combine DT-parsing parts,
>> but the rest is not that clear. At least the clock setup split should be
>> a separate patch, as it seems to require massive code motion.
>> For eg. runtime PM setup/disable or interrupt setup, I would actually suggest
>> to drop the parts as they make the code harder to follow (you have
>> a function doing nothing but calling another one).
> 
> Okay, I guess indeed it will be better to squash couple functions back,
> but excluding functions that help to make error unwinding cleaner. Thank
> you for the suggestion!
> 

Actually, looks like it will be fine to do exactly what you're
suggesting. I also noticed few more things to improve in the probe
function and other places.

BTW, you're looking at v1, but there is a v2 on the list already.