linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 7/7] regulator: tps65215: Restructure probe() for multi-PMIC support

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

Message-ID: <a76dc55a-5de7-4936-b1f0-af301da0344e@ti.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2025 15:12:27 -0600
From: Shree Ramamoorthy <s-ramamoorthy@...com>
To: Roger Quadros <rogerq@...nel.org>, <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        <broonie@...nel.org>, <robh@...nel.org>, <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
        <conor+dt@...nel.org>, <aaro.koskinen@....fi>, <andreas@...nade.info>,
        <khilman@...libre.com>, <tony@...mide.com>,
        <jerome.neanne@...libre.com>, <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
CC: <m-leonard@...com>, <praneeth@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 7/7] regulator: tps65215: Restructure probe() for
 multi-PMIC support

Hi,

On 1/4/25 12:47 PM, Roger Quadros wrote:
>
> On 26/12/2024 23:54, Shree Ramamoorthy wrote:
>> The probe() function will now utilize the register_regulators() and
>> request_irqs() helper functions defined in the previous patch. Probe() will
>> cycle through common (overlapping) regulators and irqs first, and then
>> handle device-specific resources identified using the chip_data struct.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Shree Ramamoorthy <s-ramamoorthy@...com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/regulator/tps65219-regulator.c | 66 +++++++++++---------------
>>   1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 39 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/regulator/tps65219-regulator.c b/drivers/regulator/tps65219-regulator.c
>> index 8469ee89802c..b27888fd1fa8 100644
>> --- a/drivers/regulator/tps65219-regulator.c
>> +++ b/drivers/regulator/tps65219-regulator.c
>> @@ -413,54 +413,42 @@ static int tps65219_request_irqs(struct tps65219_regulator_irq_type *irq_types,
>>   static int tps65219_regulator_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>   {
>>   	struct tps65219 *tps = dev_get_drvdata(pdev->dev.parent);
>> -	struct regulator_dev *rdev;
>>   	struct regulator_config config = { };
>> -	int i;
>>   	int error;
>> -	int irq;
>>   	struct tps65219_regulator_irq_data *irq_data;
>> -	struct tps65219_regulator_irq_type *irq_type;
>> +	struct chip_data *pmic;
> reverse xmas tree.
>
>>   
>> -	config.dev = tps->dev;
>> -	config.driver_data = tps;
>> -	config.regmap = tps->regmap;
>>   
>> -	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(regulators); i++) {
>> -		rdev = devm_regulator_register(&pdev->dev, &regulators[i],
>> -					       &config);
>> -		if (IS_ERR(rdev))
>> -			return dev_err_probe(tps->dev, PTR_ERR(rdev),
>> -					"Failed to register %s regulator\n",
>> -					regulators[i].name);
>> -	}
>> -
>> -	irq_data = devm_kmalloc(tps->dev,
>> -				ARRAY_SIZE(tps65219_regulator_irq_types) *
>> -				sizeof(struct tps65219_regulator_irq_data),
>> -				GFP_KERNEL);
>> -	if (!irq_data)
>> -		return -ENOMEM;
>> -
>> -	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(tps65219_regulator_irq_types); ++i) {
>> -		irq_type = &tps65219_regulator_irq_types[i];
>> +	enum pmic_id chip = platform_get_device_id(pdev)->driver_data;
>>   
>> -		irq = platform_get_irq_byname(pdev, irq_type->irq_name);
>> -		if (irq < 0)
>> -			return -EINVAL;
> need a new line after declarations.
>
>> +	pmic = &chip_info_table[chip];
>>   
>> -		irq_data[i].dev = tps->dev;
>> -		irq_data[i].type = irq_type;
>> +	config.dev = tps->dev;
>> +	config.driver_data = tps;
>> +	config.regmap = tps->regmap;
>>   
>> -		error = devm_request_threaded_irq(tps->dev, irq, NULL,
>> -						  tps65219_regulator_irq_handler,
>> -						  IRQF_ONESHOT,
>> -						  irq_type->irq_name,
>> -						  &irq_data[i]);
>> -		if (error) {
>> -			dev_err(tps->dev, "failed to request %s IRQ %d: %d\n",
>> -				irq_type->irq_name, irq, error);
>> +	error = tps65219_register_regulators(pmic->common_rdesc, tps,
>> +						&pdev->dev, config, pmic->common_rdesc_size);
>> +	if (error)
> maybe you could use goto and do any cleanup
> and in the end use dev_err_probe().

Looking through all of the feedback/ideas, I am planning to have the helper functions return the error,
use goto to check and return dev_err_probe if an error is detected. This should hopefully minimize the
amount of repeated error checks in this probe function. Thank you for the feedback!

>> +		return error;
>> +
>> +	error = tps65219_register_regulators(pmic->rdesc, tps, &pdev->dev,
>> +						config, pmic->rdesc_size);
>> +	if (error)
>> +		return error;
>> +
>> +	irq_data = devm_kmalloc(tps->dev, pmic->common_irq_size, GFP_KERNEL);
>> +	error = tps65219_request_irqs(pmic->common_irq_types, tps, pdev,
>> +					irq_data, pmic->common_irq_size);
>> +	if (error)
>> +		return error;
>> +
>> +	if (chip == TPS65219) {
>> +		irq_data = devm_kmalloc(tps->dev, pmic->dev_irq_size, GFP_KERNEL);
>> +		error = tps65219_request_irqs(pmic->irq_types, tps, pdev,
>> +						irq_data, pmic->dev_irq_size);
>> +		if (error)
>>   			return error;
>> -		}
>>   	}
>>   
>>   	return 0;

-- 
Best,
Shree Ramamoorthy
PMIC Software Engineer