lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Apr]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 04/12] mtd: rawnand: stm32_fmc2: manage all errors cases at probe time
From
Date


On 4/27/20 10:10 PM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> On 4/27/20 10:08 PM, Miquel Raynal wrote:
>> Hi Marek,
>>
>> Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de> wrote on Mon, 27 Apr 2020 21:46:44 +0200:
>>
>>> On 4/27/20 8:08 PM, Miquel Raynal wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>>>>> /* FMC2 init routine */
>>>>>>> stm32_fmc2_init(fmc2);
>>>>>>> @@ -1997,7 +2001,7 @@ static int stm32_fmc2_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>>>>> /* Scan to find existence of the device */
>>>>>>> ret = nand_scan(chip, nand->ncs);
>>>>>>> if (ret)
>>>>>>> - goto err_scan;
>>>>>>> + goto err_dma_setup;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ret = mtd_device_register(mtd, NULL, 0);
>>>>>>> if (ret)
>>>>>>> @@ -2010,7 +2014,7 @@ static int stm32_fmc2_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>>>>> err_device_register:
>>>>>>> nand_cleanup(chip);
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -err_scan:
>>>>>>> +err_dma_setup:
>>>>>>> if (fmc2->dma_ecc_ch)
>>>>>>> dma_release_channel(fmc2->dma_ecc_ch);
>>>>>>> if (fmc2->dma_tx_ch)
>>>>>>> @@ -2021,6 +2025,7 @@ static int stm32_fmc2_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>>>>> sg_free_table(&fmc2->dma_data_sg);
>>>>>>> sg_free_table(&fmc2->dma_ecc_sg);
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +err_clk_disable:
>>>>>>> clk_disable_unprepare(fmc2->clk);
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> return ret;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I didn't spot it during my earlier reviews but I really prefer using
>>>>>> labels explaining what you do than having the same name of the function
>>>>>> which failed. This way you don't have to rework the error path when
>>>>>> you handle an additional error.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, would you mind doing this in two steps:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1/
>>>>>> Replace
>>>>>>
>>>>>> err_scan:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> with, eg.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> release_dma_objs:
>>>>>
>>>>> The ^err_ prefix in failpath labels is useful, since it's easily
>>>>> possible to match on it with regexes ; not so much on arbitrary label name.
>>>>
>>>> I guess so, but is it actually useful to catch labels in a regex? (real
>>>> question)
>>>
>>> I find it useful to have a unified way to find those labels, e.g.
>>> err_because_foo:
>>> err_because_bar:
>>> err_last_one:
>>> is much nicer than:
>>> foo_failed:
>>> bar_also_failed:
>>> its_total_randomness:
>>
>> My point being, Christophe, you can use err_ as a prefix but I think
>> it's better to use:
>>
>> err_do_this_cleanup
>>
>> than
>>
>> err_this_failed
>
> That's fine either way.

Hi Miquel,

I will rename the label in v3:
- err_device_register => err_nand_cleanup
- err_dma_setup => err_release_dma
- err_clk_disable => will keep this one

Regards,
Christophe Kerello.

>
>>>> Any way I suppose catching ":\n" is already a good approximation to
>>>> find labels?
>>>
>>> Not very practical with git grep (^err.*: works nicely though)
>>
>> I suppose ^.*:$ would work the same ;)
>
> Try and see how much other irrelevant stuff that sucks in ;-)
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-04-29 10:01    [W:0.082 / U:0.132 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site