Messages in this thread | | | From | "Rafael J. Wysocki" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/6] firmware_class: Split _request_firmware() into three functions | Date | Tue, 27 Mar 2012 23:51:50 +0200 |
| |
On Tuesday, March 27, 2012, Stephen Boyd wrote: > On 03/26/12 13:36, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Monday, March 26, 2012, Stephen Boyd wrote: > >> On 03/25/12 15:01, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > >>> @@ -639,8 +655,15 @@ static int request_firmware_work_func(vo > >>> return 0; > >>> } > >>> > >>> - ret = _request_firmware(&fw, fw_work->name, fw_work->device, > >>> + ret = _request_firmware_prepare(&fw, fw_work->name, fw_work->device); > >>> + if (ret <= 0) > >>> + return ret; > >> This needs to jump to the cont function so that users know loading > >> failed or that the firmware was builtin. > > You're right, sorry. That should have been > > > > if (ret > 0) { > > ret = _request_firmware(fw, fw_work->name, fw_work->device, > > fw_work->uevent, true); > > if (ret) > > _request_firmware_cleanup(&fw); > > } > > > > but actually using a jump makes the next patch look better. > > > > Updated patch is appended. > > --- > > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> > > Subject: firmware_class: Split _request_firmware() into three functions, v2 > > > > Split _request_firmware() into three functions, > > _request_firmware_prepare() doing preparatory work that need not be > > done under umhelper_sem, _request_firmware_cleanup() doing the > > post-error cleanup and _request_firmware() carrying out the remaining > > operations. > > > > This change is requisite for moving the acquisition of umhelper_sem > > from _request_firmware() to the callers, which is going to be done > > subsequently. > > Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>
Thanks!
Rafael
| |