[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ec901938-8e6f-48d1-9f37-09ba2907a870@web.de>
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2024 14:34:31 +0200
From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To: Chen Ni <nichen@...as.ac.cn>, dmaengine@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, Caleb Connolly <caleb.connolly@...aro.org>,
Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>,
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@...nel.org>, Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>,
Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...libre.com>,
Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, make24@...as.ac.cn
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dmaengine: qcom: bam_dma: Handle the return value of
bam_dma_resume
> As pm_runtime_force_resume() can return error numbers, it should be
> better to check the return value and deal with the exception.
1. Please improve such a change description with an imperative wording.
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?h=v6.10#n94
2. Is there a need to complete the exception handling with a clk_unprepare() call?
3. How do you think about to use a summary phrase like “Return value from
a pm_runtime_force_resume() call in bam_dma_resume()”?
4. Were any special source code analysis tools involved from your research organisation?
Regards,
Markus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists