[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0e30c12f-5ac5-4008-8cc8-ec4111520655@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2025 08:34:47 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Kevin Chen <kevin_chen@...eedtech.com>, lee@...nel.org, robh@...nel.org,
krzk+dt@...nel.org, conor+dt@...nel.org, joel@....id.au,
andrew@...econstruct.com.au, derek.kiernan@....com, dragan.cvetic@....com,
arnd@...db.de, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-aspeed@...ts.ozlabs.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] soc: aspeed: lpc-pcc: Add PCC controller support
On 10/03/2025 12:48, Kevin Chen wrote:
> +static int aspeed_pcc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> + int rc;
> + struct aspeed_pcc_ctrl *pcc;
> + struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> + uint32_t fifo_size = PAGE_SIZE;
> +
> + pcc = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*pcc), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!pcc)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + pcc->regmap = syscon_node_to_regmap(dev->parent->of_node);
> + if (IS_ERR(pcc->regmap)) {
> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't get regmap\n");
return dev_err_probe() is not suitable?
> + return -ENODEV;
Why overriding error code?
> + }
> +
> + rc = of_property_read_u32(dev->of_node, "pcc-ports", &pcc->port);
> + if (rc) {
> + dev_err(dev, "no pcc ports configured\n");
> + return -ENODEV;
Why overriding error code?
You got this comment already at v2.
> + }
> +
> + rc = dma_set_mask_and_coherent(dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(64));
> + if (rc) {
> + dev_err(dev, "cannot set 64-bits DMA mask\n");
> + return rc;
> + }
> +
> + pcc->dma.size = PCC_DMA_BUFSZ;
> + pcc->dma.virt = dmam_alloc_coherent(dev,
> + pcc->dma.size,
> + &pcc->dma.addr,
> + GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!pcc->dma.virt) {
> + dev_err(dev, "cannot allocate DMA buffer\n");
> + return -ENOMEM;
> + }
> +
> + fifo_size = roundup(pcc->dma.size, PAGE_SIZE);
> + rc = kfifo_alloc(&pcc->fifo, fifo_size, GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (rc) {
Drop {}
> + return -ENOMEM;
> + }
> +
Please run scripts/checkpatch.pl and fix reported warnings. After that,
run also `scripts/checkpatch.pl --strict` and (probably) fix more
warnings. Some warnings can be ignored, especially from --strict run,
but the code here looks like it needs a fix. Feel free to get in touch
if the warning is not clear.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists