netdev - Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] net: rnpgbe: Add build support for rnpgbe

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: <2D407F75EE3286AE+20250813061838.GA944516@nic-Precision-5820-Tower>
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2025 14:18:38 +0800
From: Yibo Dong <dong100@...se.com>
To: Vadim Fedorenko <vadim.fedorenko@...ux.dev>
Cc: andrew+netdev@...n.ch, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
	kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, horms@...nel.org,
	corbet@....net, gur.stavi@...wei.com, maddy@...ux.ibm.com,
	mpe@...erman.id.au, danishanwar@...com, lee@...ger.us,
	gongfan1@...wei.com, lorenzo@...nel.org, geert+renesas@...der.be,
	Parthiban.Veerasooran@...rochip.com, lukas.bulwahn@...hat.com,
	alexanderduyck@...com, richardcochran@...il.com,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] net: rnpgbe: Add build support for rnpgbe

On Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 04:37:52PM +0100, Vadim Fedorenko wrote:
> On 12/08/2025 10:39, Dong Yibo wrote:
> > Add build options and doc for mucse.
> > Initialize pci device access for MUCSE devices.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Dong Yibo <dong100@...se.com>
> > ---
> 
> [...]
> 
> > +/**
> > + * rnpgbe_probe - Device initialization routine
> > + * @pdev: PCI device information struct
> > + * @id: entry in rnpgbe_pci_tbl
> > + *
> > + * rnpgbe_probe initializes a PF adapter identified by a pci_dev
> > + * structure.
> > + *
> > + * @return: 0 on success, negative on failure
> > + **/
> > +static int rnpgbe_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev, const struct pci_device_id *id)
> > +{
> > +	int err;
> > +
> > +	err = pci_enable_device_mem(pdev);
> > +	if (err)
> > +		return err;
> > +
> > +	err = dma_set_coherent_mask(&pdev->dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(56));
> > +	if (err) {
> > +		dev_err(&pdev->dev,
> > +			"No usable DMA configuration, aborting %d\n", err);
> > +		goto err_dma;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	err = pci_request_mem_regions(pdev, rnpgbe_driver_name);
> > +	if (err) {
> > +		dev_err(&pdev->dev,
> > +			"pci_request_selected_regions failed 0x%x\n", err);
> > +		goto err_pci_req;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	pci_set_master(pdev);
> > +	pci_save_state(pdev);
> > +
> > +	return 0;
> > +err_dma:
> > +err_pci_req:
> > +	pci_disable_device(pdev);
> > +	return err;
> > +}
> 
> Why do you need 2 different labels pointing to the very same line? The
> code is not changed through patchset, I see no reasons to have it like
> this
> 
> 
> 
You are right, I should only 1 label here.

Thanks for your feedback.