linux-kernel - Re: [v6] dma-engine: sun4i: Simplify error handling in probe()

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]

Message-ID: <7332ccd2-ebe6-4b9d-a2ae-8f33641e7bd4@web.de>
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2025 09:47:45 +0100
From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To: Csókás Bence <csokas.bence@...lan.hu>,
 dmaengine@...r.kernel.org, linux-sunxi@...ts.linux.dev,
 linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...nel.org>,
 Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>,
 Christophe Jaillet <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>,
 Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@...il.com>,
 Samuel Holland <samuel@...lland.org>, Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [v6] dma-engine: sun4i: Simplify error handling in probe()

>>> Clean up error handling by using devm functions and dev_err_probe().
>> …
>>
>> Do any contributors care for a different patch granularity?
>> https://web.git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?h=v6.14#n81
>
> I still don't understand why you are so adamant on this.

There are developers who tend to prefer an other change granularity.


> It is just a simple refactor patch changing 33 lines,

The transformation goal is fine.


> mostly in one function, with no logic change.

Implementation details are probably worth for another look.


> Does it break something in your system? Please explain yourself so we can understand your viewpoint better.

I hope that the understanding can grow also for another bit of refinement.


>> Will it be clearer to mention also the function name “sun4i_dma_probe”
>> in the summary phrases?
>
> I already added it as per your last response, did you not read the message?
>
> On 2025. 03. 24. 18:20, Bence Csókás wrote:
>> Clean up error handling by using devm functions and dev_err_probe(). This
>> should make it easier to add new code, as we can eliminate the "goto
>> ladder" in sun4i_dma_probe().
Please distinguish better between information from the “changelog”
and items in a message subject.

Regards,
Markus