linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] clk: hisilicon: refine hi3620_mmc_clk

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <5b976ad4-43e2-a021-6a93-25642b44cec5@huawei.com>
Date:   Thu, 19 Nov 2020 20:01:22 +0800
From:   Dongjiu Geng <gengdongjiu@...wei.com>
To:     Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>, <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>
CC:     <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org>,
        Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
        Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] clk: hisilicon: refine hi3620_mmc_clk_init() and fix
 memory leak issues

On 2020/11/19 17:07, Markus Elfring wrote:
>> Refine hi3620_mmc_clk_init() to use of_clk_add_hw_provider()
>> instead of of_clk_add_provider(), …
> 
> …
>> +++ b/drivers/clk/hisilicon/clk-hi3620.c
> …
>> @@ -439,17 +440,22 @@  static struct clk *hisi_register_clk_mmc(struct hisi_mmc_clock *mmc_clk,
> …
>> +	err = clk_hw_register(NULL, hw);
>> +
>> +	if (err) {
> 
> I suggest to omit a blank line here.
> 
> 
> …
>> +++ b/drivers/clk/hisilicon/clk.c
>> @@ -65,25 +65,26 @@  struct hisi_clock_data *hisi_clk_init(struct device_node *np,
> …
>>  	of_clk_add_provider(np, of_clk_src_onecell_get, &clk_data->clk_data);
>>  	return clk_data;
>> -err_data:
>> +free_clk_data:
> 
> How do you think about to adjust also such a function call for this function implementation?
> 
> Will further collateral evolution become interesting?
> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.10-rc4/C/ident/of_clk_add_provider
Thanks for the review.

How about we adjust such a function call in another series patches?  I suggest do it in another series.
For this patch, how about we firstly merge it after I fix the above comments(omit a blank line)?

> 
> Regards,
> Markus
> .
>