This patch fixes some issues in the error handling and simplifies
the code by converting to devm* functions.
If the kzalloc call fails it is unnecessary to use the label no_res
and pass a NULL pointer to kfree. If the devm_kzalloc call fails on
line 110 we forgett to call iounmap for the previous ioremap call.
The following changes are introduced:
- Convert to devm_kzalloc and remove calls to kfree.
- Convert to devm_ioremap_resource that adds a missing call to
*request_mem_region and remove calls to iounmap.
- The devm_ioremap_resource function checks the passed resource so
we can remove the NULL check after the platform_get_resource call.
Signed-off-by: Emil Goode <[email protected]>
---
The patch is only build tested
drivers/mtd/nand/orion_nand.c | 39 +++++++++++----------------------------
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/orion_nand.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/orion_nand.c
index 8fbd002..cc22f2f 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/nand/orion_nand.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/orion_nand.c
@@ -85,34 +85,25 @@ static int __init orion_nand_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
int ret = 0;
u32 val = 0;
- nc = kzalloc(sizeof(struct nand_chip) + sizeof(struct mtd_info), GFP_KERNEL);
+ nc = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(struct nand_chip) +
+ sizeof(struct mtd_info), GFP_KERNEL);
if (!nc) {
printk(KERN_ERR "orion_nand: failed to allocate device structure.\n");
- ret = -ENOMEM;
- goto no_res;
+ return -ENOMEM;
}
mtd = (struct mtd_info *)(nc + 1);
res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 0);
- if (!res) {
- ret = -ENODEV;
- goto no_res;
- }
-
- io_base = ioremap(res->start, resource_size(res));
- if (!io_base) {
- printk(KERN_ERR "orion_nand: ioremap failed\n");
- ret = -EIO;
- goto no_res;
- }
+ io_base = devm_ioremap_resource(&pdev->dev, res);
+ if (IS_ERR(io_base))
+ return PTR_ERR(io_base);
if (pdev->dev.of_node) {
board = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(struct orion_nand_data),
- GFP_KERNEL);
+ GFP_KERNEL);
if (!board) {
printk(KERN_ERR "orion_nand: failed to allocate board structure.\n");
- ret = -ENOMEM;
- goto no_res;
+ return -ENOMEM;
}
if (!of_property_read_u32(pdev->dev.of_node, "cle", &val))
board->cle = (u8)val;
@@ -167,7 +158,7 @@ static int __init orion_nand_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
if (nand_scan(mtd, 1)) {
ret = -ENXIO;
- goto no_dev;
+ goto disable_clk;
}
mtd->name = "orion_nand";
@@ -176,20 +167,17 @@ static int __init orion_nand_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
board->parts, board->nr_parts);
if (ret) {
nand_release(mtd);
- goto no_dev;
+ goto disable_clk;
}
return 0;
-no_dev:
+disable_clk:
if (!IS_ERR(clk)) {
clk_disable_unprepare(clk);
clk_put(clk);
}
platform_set_drvdata(pdev, NULL);
- iounmap(io_base);
-no_res:
- kfree(nc);
return ret;
}
@@ -197,15 +185,10 @@ no_res:
static int orion_nand_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
{
struct mtd_info *mtd = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
- struct nand_chip *nc = mtd->priv;
struct clk *clk;
nand_release(mtd);
- iounmap(nc->IO_ADDR_W);
-
- kfree(nc);
-
clk = clk_get(&pdev->dev, NULL);
if (!IS_ERR(clk)) {
clk_disable_unprepare(clk);
--
1.7.10.4
On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 12:08 PM, Emil Goode <[email protected]> wrote:
> This patch fixes some issues in the error handling and simplifies
> the code by converting to devm* functions.
>
> If the kzalloc call fails it is unnecessary to use the label no_res
> and pass a NULL pointer to kfree. If the devm_kzalloc call fails on
> line 110 we forgett to call iounmap for the previous ioremap call.
"forget" (typo here)
> The following changes are introduced:
> - Convert to devm_kzalloc and remove calls to kfree.
> - Convert to devm_ioremap_resource that adds a missing call to
> *request_mem_region and remove calls to iounmap.
> - The devm_ioremap_resource function checks the passed resource so
> we can remove the NULL check after the platform_get_resource call.
What about another patch (that I guess should go first) that converts
printk to dev_* or pr_*?
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 08:15:20PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 12:08 PM, Emil Goode <[email protected]> wrote:
> > This patch fixes some issues in the error handling and simplifies
> > the code by converting to devm* functions.
> >
> > If the kzalloc call fails it is unnecessary to use the label no_res
> > and pass a NULL pointer to kfree. If the devm_kzalloc call fails on
> > line 110 we forgett to call iounmap for the previous ioremap call.
>
> "forget" (typo here)
>
> > The following changes are introduced:
> > - Convert to devm_kzalloc and remove calls to kfree.
> > - Convert to devm_ioremap_resource that adds a missing call to
> > *request_mem_region and remove calls to iounmap.
> > - The devm_ioremap_resource function checks the passed resource so
> > we can remove the NULL check after the platform_get_resource call.
>
> What about another patch (that I guess should go first) that converts
> printk to dev_* or pr_*?
>
Huh, what? Those are two totally unrelated things. Emil's patch is
a bug fix.
Patches are applied in first come first serve order anyway, so I'm
not sure what you are saying.
regards,
dan carpenter
On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 10:17 PM, Dan Carpenter <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 08:15:20PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
[]
>> What about another patch (that I guess should go first) that converts
>> printk to dev_* or pr_*?
> Huh, what? Those are two totally unrelated things. Emil's patch is
> a bug fix.
To be precise his patch is bugfix and cleanup at once.
My proposal is to add a clean up patch.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 10:27:03PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 10:17 PM, Dan Carpenter <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 08:15:20PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>
> []
>
> >> What about another patch (that I guess should go first) that converts
> >> printk to dev_* or pr_*?
>
> > Huh, what? Those are two totally unrelated things. Emil's patch is
> > a bug fix.
>
> To be precise his patch is bugfix and cleanup at once.
> My proposal is to add a clean up patch.
The printk idea isn't a bad one, it's just totally unrelated to what
the patch is doing. You can't just randomly tell people to do a
bunch of work for no reason. "Good bugfix, but before we apply it
you have to mow my lawn."
regards,
dan carpenter
On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 11:57 PM, Dan Carpenter <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 10:27:03PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 10:17 PM, Dan Carpenter <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 08:15:20PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> >> What about another patch (that I guess should go first) that converts
>> >> printk to dev_* or pr_*?
>>
>> > Huh, what? Those are two totally unrelated things. Emil's patch is
>> > a bug fix.
>>
>> To be precise his patch is bugfix and cleanup at once.
>> My proposal is to add a clean up patch.
>
> The printk idea isn't a bad one, it's just totally unrelated to what
> the patch is doing.
I don't agree with word 'totally'. It touches probe function and
shuffles code there.
> You can't just randomly tell people to do a
> bunch of work for no reason. "Good bugfix, but before we apply it
> you have to mow my lawn."
In this particular case I didn't think it's a big deal to fix 3 printfs.
Anyway, see patch in the next message.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Hello,
Sorry for not responding earlier, I was away from my computer.
Thanks for the review, I will send a second version that applies
on top of Andy's patch and fix that typo in the change log.
Best regards,
Emil
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 12:15:22AM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 11:57 PM, Dan Carpenter <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 10:27:03PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >> On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 10:17 PM, Dan Carpenter <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> > On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 08:15:20PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>
> >> >> What about another patch (that I guess should go first) that converts
> >> >> printk to dev_* or pr_*?
> >>
> >> > Huh, what? Those are two totally unrelated things. Emil's patch is
> >> > a bug fix.
> >>
> >> To be precise his patch is bugfix and cleanup at once.
> >> My proposal is to add a clean up patch.
> >
> > The printk idea isn't a bad one, it's just totally unrelated to what
> > the patch is doing.
>
> I don't agree with word 'totally'. It touches probe function and
> shuffles code there.
>
> > You can't just randomly tell people to do a
> > bunch of work for no reason. "Good bugfix, but before we apply it
> > you have to mow my lawn."
>
> In this particular case I didn't think it's a big deal to fix 3 printfs.
> Anyway, see patch in the next message.
>
>
> --
> With Best Regards,
> Andy Shevchenko