linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] remoteproc: mtk_scp: Use dev_err

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:   Tue, 1 Feb 2022 11:36:12 -0700
From:   Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>
To:     AngeloGioacchino Del Regno 
        <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>
Cc:     bjorn.andersson@...aro.org, matthias.bgg@...il.com,
        linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel@...labora.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] remoteproc: mtk_scp: Use dev_err_probe() where
 possible

Hi Angelo,

On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 01:09:15PM +0100, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
> Simplify the probe function, where possible, by using dev_err_probe().
> While at it, as to increase human readability, also remove some
> unnecessary forced void pointer casts that were previously used in
> error checking.

I am in favour of all 3 patches (please add a cover letter next time) but weary
about testing - do you have access to a Mediatek platform to try this on or
is it purely theoretical?

I would definitely feel better to see a "Tested-by" tag by someone out there
with access to the HW.

Thanks,
Mathieu

> 
> Signed-off-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>
> ---
>  drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c | 28 ++++++++++++----------------
>  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c b/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c
> index e40706b0e015..dcddb33e9997 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c
> @@ -757,10 +757,8 @@ static int scp_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  	int ret, i;
>  
>  	rproc = devm_rproc_alloc(dev, np->name, &scp_ops, fw_name, sizeof(*scp));
> -	if (!rproc) {
> -		dev_err(dev, "unable to allocate remoteproc\n");
> -		return -ENOMEM;
> -	}
> +	if (!rproc)
> +		return dev_err_probe(dev, -ENOMEM, "unable to allocate remoteproc\n");
>  
>  	scp = (struct mtk_scp *)rproc->priv;
>  	scp->rproc = rproc;
> @@ -770,21 +768,20 @@ static int scp_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  
>  	res = platform_get_resource_byname(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, "sram");
>  	scp->sram_base = devm_ioremap_resource(dev, res);
> -	if (IS_ERR((__force void *)scp->sram_base)) {
> -		dev_err(dev, "Failed to parse and map sram memory\n");
> -		return PTR_ERR((__force void *)scp->sram_base);
> -	}
> +	if (IS_ERR(scp->sram_base))
> +		return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(scp->sram_base),
> +				     "Failed to parse and map sram memory\n");
> +
>  	scp->sram_size = resource_size(res);
>  	scp->sram_phys = res->start;
>  
>  	/* l1tcm is an optional memory region */
>  	res = platform_get_resource_byname(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, "l1tcm");
>  	scp->l1tcm_base = devm_ioremap_resource(dev, res);
> -	if (IS_ERR((__force void *)scp->l1tcm_base)) {
> -		ret = PTR_ERR((__force void *)scp->l1tcm_base);
> +	if (IS_ERR(scp->l1tcm_base)) {
> +		ret = PTR_ERR(scp->l1tcm_base);
>  		if (ret != -EINVAL) {
> -			dev_err(dev, "Failed to map l1tcm memory\n");
> -			return ret;
> +			return dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "Failed to map l1tcm memory\n");
>  		}
>  	} else {
>  		scp->l1tcm_size = resource_size(res);
> @@ -792,10 +789,9 @@ static int scp_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  	}
>  
>  	scp->reg_base = devm_platform_ioremap_resource_byname(pdev, "cfg");
> -	if (IS_ERR((__force void *)scp->reg_base)) {
> -		dev_err(dev, "Failed to parse and map cfg memory\n");
> -		return PTR_ERR((__force void *)scp->reg_base);
> -	}
> +	if (IS_ERR(scp->reg_base))
> +		return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(scp->reg_base),
> +				     "Failed to parse and map cfg memory\n");
>  
>  	ret = scp->data->scp_clk_get(scp);
>  	if (ret)
> -- 
> 2.33.1
>