[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <bb1aea80-a926-8545-646e-bb526bc5cb84@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 May 2022 11:49:32 +0200
From: Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>
To: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
<angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
nfraprado@...labora.com, rex-bc.chen@...iatek.com,
zhiyong.tao@...iatek.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/5] soc: mediatek: pwrap: Move and check return value
of platform_get_irq()
On 17/05/2022 11:34, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
> Il 17/05/22 11:18, Matthias Brugger ha scritto:
>>
>>
>> On 16/05/2022 14:46, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
>>> Move the call to platform_get_irq() earlier in the probe function
>>> and check for its return value: if no interrupt is specified, it
>>> wouldn't make sense to try to call devm_request_irq() so, in that
>>> case, we can simply return early.
>>>
>>> Moving the platform_get_irq() call also makes it possible to use
>>> one less goto, as clocks aren't required at that stage.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
>>> <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>
>>> Reviewed-by: Nícolas F. R. A. Prado <nfraprado@...labora.com>
>>> Tested-by: Nícolas F. R. A. Prado <nfraprado@...labora.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c | 5 ++++-
>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c
>>> b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c
>>> index 852514366f1f..332cbcabc299 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c
>>> @@ -2204,6 +2204,10 @@ static int pwrap_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>> if (!wrp)
>>> return -ENOMEM;
>>> + irq = platform_get_irq(pdev, 0);
>>> + if (irq < 0)
>>> + return irq;
>>> +
>>> platform_set_drvdata(pdev, wrp);
>>> wrp->master = of_device_get_match_data(&pdev->dev);
>>> @@ -2316,7 +2320,6 @@ static int pwrap_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>> if (HAS_CAP(wrp->master->caps, PWRAP_CAP_INT1_EN))
>>> pwrap_writel(wrp, wrp->master->int1_en_all, PWRAP_INT1_EN);
>>> - irq = platform_get_irq(pdev, 0);
>>
>> For better readability of the code I'd prefer to keep platform_get_irq next to
>> devm_request_irq. I understand that you did this change so that you don't have
>> to code
>> if (irq < 0) {
>> ret = irq;
>> goto err_out2;
>> }
>>
>> Or do I miss something?
>>
>
> That's for the sake of reducing gotos in the code... but there's a bigger
> picture that I haven't explained in this commit and that will come later
> because I currently don't have the necessary time to perform a "decent"
> testing.
>
> As I was explaining - the bigger pictures implies adding a new function for
> clock teardown, that we will add as a devm action:
>
> devm_add_action_or_reset(&pdev->dev, pwrap_clk_disable_unprepare, wrp)
>
> ...so that we will be able to remove *all* gotos from the probe function.
>
> Sounds good?
>
Sounds good, but that means we could get rid of the goto as well. Anyway I
prefer to have platform_get_irq next to devm_request_irq. If we can get rid of
the goto in the future, great.
Regards,
Matthias
Powered by blists - more mailing lists