Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 17 May 2022 11:49:32 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 3/5] soc: mediatek: pwrap: Move and check return value of platform_get_irq() | From | Matthias Brugger <> |
| |
On 17/05/2022 11:34, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote: > Il 17/05/22 11:18, Matthias Brugger ha scritto: >> >> >> On 16/05/2022 14:46, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote: >>> Move the call to platform_get_irq() earlier in the probe function >>> and check for its return value: if no interrupt is specified, it >>> wouldn't make sense to try to call devm_request_irq() so, in that >>> case, we can simply return early. >>> >>> Moving the platform_get_irq() call also makes it possible to use >>> one less goto, as clocks aren't required at that stage. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno >>> <angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com> >>> Reviewed-by: Nícolas F. R. A. Prado <nfraprado@collabora.com> >>> Tested-by: Nícolas F. R. A. Prado <nfraprado@collabora.com> >>> --- >>> drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c | 5 ++++- >>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c >>> b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c >>> index 852514366f1f..332cbcabc299 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c >>> +++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c >>> @@ -2204,6 +2204,10 @@ static int pwrap_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >>> if (!wrp) >>> return -ENOMEM; >>> + irq = platform_get_irq(pdev, 0); >>> + if (irq < 0) >>> + return irq; >>> + >>> platform_set_drvdata(pdev, wrp); >>> wrp->master = of_device_get_match_data(&pdev->dev); >>> @@ -2316,7 +2320,6 @@ static int pwrap_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >>> if (HAS_CAP(wrp->master->caps, PWRAP_CAP_INT1_EN)) >>> pwrap_writel(wrp, wrp->master->int1_en_all, PWRAP_INT1_EN); >>> - irq = platform_get_irq(pdev, 0); >> >> For better readability of the code I'd prefer to keep platform_get_irq next to >> devm_request_irq. I understand that you did this change so that you don't have >> to code >> if (irq < 0) { >> ret = irq; >> goto err_out2; >> } >> >> Or do I miss something? >> > > That's for the sake of reducing gotos in the code... but there's a bigger > picture that I haven't explained in this commit and that will come later > because I currently don't have the necessary time to perform a "decent" > testing. > > As I was explaining - the bigger pictures implies adding a new function for > clock teardown, that we will add as a devm action: > > devm_add_action_or_reset(&pdev->dev, pwrap_clk_disable_unprepare, wrp) > > ...so that we will be able to remove *all* gotos from the probe function. > > Sounds good? >
Sounds good, but that means we could get rid of the goto as well. Anyway I prefer to have platform_get_irq next to devm_request_irq. If we can get rid of the goto in the future, great.
Regards, Matthias
| |