This patch fixes easy checkpatch issues.
Signed-off-by: Corentin Labbe <[email protected]>
---
drivers/mtd/parsers/redboot.c | 69 +++++++++++++++++------------------
1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/parsers/redboot.c b/drivers/mtd/parsers/redboot.c
index 3ccd6363ee8c..feb44a573d44 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/parsers/redboot.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/parsers/redboot.c
@@ -17,15 +17,15 @@
#include <linux/module.h>
struct fis_image_desc {
- unsigned char name[16]; // Null terminated name
- uint32_t flash_base; // Address within FLASH of image
- uint32_t mem_base; // Address in memory where it executes
- uint32_t size; // Length of image
- uint32_t entry_point; // Execution entry point
- uint32_t data_length; // Length of actual data
- unsigned char _pad[256-(16+7*sizeof(uint32_t))];
- uint32_t desc_cksum; // Checksum over image descriptor
- uint32_t file_cksum; // Checksum over image data
+ unsigned char name[16]; // Null terminated name
+ u32 flash_base; // Address within FLASH of image
+ u32 mem_base; // Address in memory where it executes
+ u32 size; // Length of image
+ u32 entry_point; // Execution entry point
+ u32 data_length; // Length of actual data
+ unsigned char _pad[256 - (16 + 7 * sizeof(u32))];
+ u32 desc_cksum; // Checksum over image descriptor
+ u32 file_cksum; // Checksum over image data
};
struct fis_list {
@@ -90,12 +90,12 @@ static int parse_redboot_partitions(struct mtd_info *master,
parse_redboot_of(master);
- if ( directory < 0 ) {
+ if (directory < 0) {
offset = master->size + directory * master->erasesize;
while (mtd_block_isbad(master, offset)) {
if (!offset) {
- nogood:
- printk(KERN_NOTICE "Failed to find a non-bad block to check for RedBoot partition table\n");
+nogood:
+ pr_notice("Failed to find a non-bad block to check for RedBoot partition table\n");
return -EIO;
}
offset -= master->erasesize;
@@ -113,8 +113,8 @@ static int parse_redboot_partitions(struct mtd_info *master,
if (!buf)
return -ENOMEM;
- printk(KERN_NOTICE "Searching for RedBoot partition table in %s at offset 0x%lx\n",
- master->name, offset);
+ pr_notice("Searching for RedBoot partition table in %s at offset 0x%lx\n",
+ master->name, offset);
ret = mtd_read(master, offset, master->erasesize, &retlen,
(void *)buf);
@@ -150,14 +150,13 @@ static int parse_redboot_partitions(struct mtd_info *master,
&& swab32(buf[i].size) < master->erasesize)) {
int j;
/* Update numslots based on actual FIS directory size */
- numslots = swab32(buf[i].size) / sizeof (struct fis_image_desc);
+ numslots = swab32(buf[i].size) / sizeof(struct fis_image_desc);
for (j = 0; j < numslots; ++j) {
-
/* A single 0xff denotes a deleted entry.
* Two of them in a row is the end of the table.
*/
if (buf[j].name[0] == 0xff) {
- if (buf[j].name[1] == 0xff) {
+ if (buf[j].name[1] == 0xff) {
break;
} else {
continue;
@@ -184,8 +183,8 @@ static int parse_redboot_partitions(struct mtd_info *master,
}
if (i == numslots) {
/* Didn't find it */
- printk(KERN_NOTICE "No RedBoot partition table detected in %s\n",
- master->name);
+ pr_notice("No RedBoot partition table detected in %s\n",
+ master->name);
ret = 0;
goto out;
}
@@ -204,7 +203,7 @@ static int parse_redboot_partitions(struct mtd_info *master,
break;
new_fl = kmalloc(sizeof(struct fis_list), GFP_KERNEL);
- namelen += strlen(buf[i].name)+1;
+ namelen += strlen(buf[i].name) + 1;
if (!new_fl) {
ret = -ENOMEM;
goto out;
@@ -213,13 +212,13 @@ static int parse_redboot_partitions(struct mtd_info *master,
if (data && data->origin)
buf[i].flash_base -= data->origin;
else
- buf[i].flash_base &= master->size-1;
+ buf[i].flash_base &= master->size - 1;
/* I'm sure the JFFS2 code has done me permanent damage.
* I now think the following is _normal_
*/
prev = &fl;
- while(*prev && (*prev)->img->flash_base < new_fl->img->flash_base)
+ while (*prev && (*prev)->img->flash_base < new_fl->img->flash_base)
prev = &(*prev)->next;
new_fl->next = *prev;
*prev = new_fl;
@@ -239,7 +238,7 @@ static int parse_redboot_partitions(struct mtd_info *master,
}
}
#endif
- parts = kzalloc(sizeof(*parts)*nrparts + nulllen + namelen, GFP_KERNEL);
+ parts = kzalloc(sizeof(*parts) * nrparts + nulllen + namelen, GFP_KERNEL);
if (!parts) {
ret = -ENOMEM;
@@ -248,23 +247,22 @@ static int parse_redboot_partitions(struct mtd_info *master,
nullname = (char *)&parts[nrparts];
#ifdef CONFIG_MTD_REDBOOT_PARTS_UNALLOCATED
- if (nulllen > 0) {
+ if (nulllen > 0)
strcpy(nullname, nullstring);
- }
#endif
names = nullname + nulllen;
- i=0;
+ i = 0;
#ifdef CONFIG_MTD_REDBOOT_PARTS_UNALLOCATED
if (fl->img->flash_base) {
- parts[0].name = nullname;
- parts[0].size = fl->img->flash_base;
- parts[0].offset = 0;
+ parts[0].name = nullname;
+ parts[0].size = fl->img->flash_base;
+ parts[0].offset = 0;
i++;
}
#endif
- for ( ; i<nrparts; i++) {
+ for ( ; i < nrparts; i++) {
parts[i].size = fl->img->size;
parts[i].offset = fl->img->flash_base;
parts[i].name = names;
@@ -272,17 +270,17 @@ static int parse_redboot_partitions(struct mtd_info *master,
strcpy(names, fl->img->name);
#ifdef CONFIG_MTD_REDBOOT_PARTS_READONLY
if (!memcmp(names, "RedBoot", 8) ||
- !memcmp(names, "RedBoot config", 15) ||
- !memcmp(names, "FIS directory", 14)) {
+ !memcmp(names, "RedBoot config", 15) ||
+ !memcmp(names, "FIS directory", 14)) {
parts[i].mask_flags = MTD_WRITEABLE;
}
#endif
- names += strlen(names)+1;
+ names += strlen(names) + 1;
#ifdef CONFIG_MTD_REDBOOT_PARTS_UNALLOCATED
- if(fl->next && fl->img->flash_base + fl->img->size + master->erasesize <= fl->next->img->flash_base) {
+ if (fl->next && fl->img->flash_base + fl->img->size + master->erasesize <= fl->next->img->flash_base) {
i++;
- parts[i].offset = parts[i-1].size + parts[i-1].offset;
+ parts[i].offset = parts[i - 1].size + parts[i - 1].offset;
parts[i].size = fl->next->img->flash_base - parts[i].offset;
parts[i].name = nullname;
}
@@ -296,6 +294,7 @@ static int parse_redboot_partitions(struct mtd_info *master,
out:
while (fl) {
struct fis_list *old = fl;
+
fl = fl->next;
kfree(old);
}
--
2.26.3
On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 1:49 PM Corentin Labbe <[email protected]> wrote:
> This patch fixes easy checkpatch issues.
>
> Signed-off-by: Corentin Labbe <[email protected]>
(...)
> - uint32_t flash_base; // Address within FLASH of image
(...)
> + u32 flash_base; // Address within FLASH of image
Does checkpatch complain about this? At one point the MTD maintainer
disliked the u32/u16/u8 types and explicitly wanted to use the C
standard library types, and it's the kind of eccentric maintainer
deviations we accommodate for.
From my personal side:
Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <[email protected]>
Yours,
Linus Walleij
Hello,
Linus Walleij <[email protected]> wrote on Thu, 20 May 2021
17:24:26 +0200:
> On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 1:49 PM Corentin Labbe <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > This patch fixes easy checkpatch issues.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Corentin Labbe <[email protected]>
> (...)
> > - uint32_t flash_base; // Address within FLASH of image
> (...)
> > + u32 flash_base; // Address within FLASH of image
>
> Does checkpatch complain about this? At one point the MTD maintainer
> disliked the u32/u16/u8 types and explicitly wanted to use the C
> standard library types, and it's the kind of eccentric maintainer
> deviations we accommodate for.
I suppose this happened quite some time ago? :)
I've never heard Richard nor Boris complaining about it, nor will I.
Cheers,
Miquèl
On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 5:36 PM Miquel Raynal <[email protected]> wrote:
> Linus Walleij <[email protected]> wrote on Thu, 20 May 2021
> 17:24:26 +0200:
> > On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 1:49 PM Corentin Labbe <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > This patch fixes easy checkpatch issues.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Corentin Labbe <[email protected]>
> > (...)
> > > - uint32_t flash_base; // Address within FLASH of image
> > (...)
> > > + u32 flash_base; // Address within FLASH of image
> >
> > Does checkpatch complain about this? At one point the MTD maintainer
> > disliked the u32/u16/u8 types and explicitly wanted to use the C
> > standard library types, and it's the kind of eccentric maintainer
> > deviations we accommodate for.
>
> I suppose this happened quite some time ago? :)
>
> I've never heard Richard nor Boris complaining about it, nor will I.
Yes that was a specific David Woodhouse preference.
I'm too old!
Yours,
Linus Walleij
Linus Walleij <[email protected]> wrote on Thu, 20 May 2021
18:00:04 +0200:
> On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 5:36 PM Miquel Raynal <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Linus Walleij <[email protected]> wrote on Thu, 20 May 2021
> > 17:24:26 +0200:
> > > On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 1:49 PM Corentin Labbe <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > This patch fixes easy checkpatch issues.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Corentin Labbe <[email protected]>
> > > (...)
> > > > - uint32_t flash_base; // Address within FLASH of image
> > > (...)
> > > > + u32 flash_base; // Address within FLASH of image
> > >
> > > Does checkpatch complain about this? At one point the MTD maintainer
> > > disliked the u32/u16/u8 types and explicitly wanted to use the C
> > > standard library types, and it's the kind of eccentric maintainer
> > > deviations we accommodate for.
> >
> > I suppose this happened quite some time ago? :)
> >
> > I've never heard Richard nor Boris complaining about it, nor will I.
>
> Yes that was a specific David Woodhouse preference.
> I'm too old!
Don't be sad, the new trend is to be sleek. In the dark I worship
variables declaration in a reverse Christmas tree order ;-)
On Thu, 2021-05-20 at 11:48:51 UTC, Corentin Labbe wrote:
> This patch fixes easy checkpatch issues.
>
> Signed-off-by: Corentin Labbe <[email protected]>
> Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <[email protected]>
Applied to https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mtd/linux.git mtd/next, thanks.
Miquel