[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2fa5f053-6b4f-40e4-86f5-807c3c6dfee9@moroto.mountain>
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2024 16:33:33 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>
To: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
Cc: Diogo Ivo <diogo.ivo@...mens.com>, danishanwar@...com,
rogerq@...nel.org, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, andrew@...n.ch, vigneshr@...com,
jan.kiszka@...mens.com, robh@...nel.org, grygorii.strashko@...com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: ti: icssg-prueth: Remove duplicate cleanup
calls in emac_ndo_stop()
On Thu, Feb 08, 2024 at 10:47:00AM +0000, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 06, 2024 at 03:20:51PM +0000, Diogo Ivo wrote:
> > Remove the duplicate calls to prueth_emac_stop() and
> > prueth_cleanup_tx_chns() in emac_ndo_stop().
> >
> > Fixes: 128d5874c082 ("net: ti: icssg-prueth: Add ICSSG ethernet driver")
> > Fixes: 186734c15886 ("net: ti: icssg-prueth: add packet timestamping and ptp support")
> > Signed-off-by: Diogo Ivo <diogo.ivo@...mens.com>
>
> Hi Doigo,
>
> I see that there are indeed duplicate calls,
> but I do wonder if this is a cleanup rather than a bug:
> is there a user-visible problem that this addresses?
>
> If so, I think it would be good to spell this out in the commit message.
>
> ...
So far as I can see from reviewing the code there is no user visible
effect.
rproc_shutdown() calls rproc_stop() which sets "rproc->state = RPROC_OFFLINE;"
so the second call will return be a no-op and return -EINVAL. But the
return value is not checked so no problem.
prueth_cleanup_tx_chns() uses memset to zero out the emac->tx_chns[] so
the second call will be a no-op.
regards,
dan carpenter
Powered by blists - more mailing lists