2023-03-01 07:31:23

by Manivannan Sadhasivam

Subject: [PATCH] ufs: host: ufs-qcom: Return directly if MCQ resource is provided in DT

Instead of using a goto label to return, let's return directly in the
"if" condition after setting mcq_base.

Signed-off-by: Manivannan Sadhasivam <[email protected]>
---
drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.c | 9 ++++-----
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.c b/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.c
index 34fc453f3eb1..d90f963eed02 100644
--- a/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.c
+++ b/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.c
@@ -1460,8 +1460,10 @@ static int ufs_qcom_mcq_config_resource(struct ufs_hba *hba)
/* MCQ resource provided in DT */
res = &hba->res[RES_MCQ];
/* Bail if MCQ resource is provided */
- if (res->base)
- goto out;
+ if (res->base) {
+ hba->mcq_base = res->base;
+ return 0;
+ }

/* Explicitly allocate MCQ resource from ufs_mem */
res_mcq = devm_kzalloc(hba->dev, sizeof(*res_mcq), GFP_KERNEL);
@@ -1489,9 +1491,6 @@ static int ufs_qcom_mcq_config_resource(struct ufs_hba *hba)
goto ioremap_err;
}

-out:
- hba->mcq_base = res->base;
- return 0;
ioremap_err:
res->base = NULL;
remove_resource(res_mcq);
--
2.25.1

2023-03-01 18:07:51

by Bart Van Assche

Subject: Re: [PATCH] ufs: host: ufs-qcom: Return directly if MCQ resource is provided in DT

On 2/28/23 23:31, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> Instead of using a goto label to return, let's return directly in the
> "if" condition after setting mcq_base.
>
> Signed-off-by: Manivannan Sadhasivam <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.c | 9 ++++-----
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.c b/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.c
> index 34fc453f3eb1..d90f963eed02 100644
> --- a/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.c
> +++ b/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.c
> @@ -1460,8 +1460,10 @@ static int ufs_qcom_mcq_config_resource(struct ufs_hba *hba)
> /* MCQ resource provided in DT */
> res = &hba->res[RES_MCQ];
> /* Bail if MCQ resource is provided */
> - if (res->base)
> - goto out;
> + if (res->base) {
> + hba->mcq_base = res->base;
> + return 0;
> + }
>
> /* Explicitly allocate MCQ resource from ufs_mem */
> res_mcq = devm_kzalloc(hba->dev, sizeof(*res_mcq), GFP_KERNEL);
> @@ -1489,9 +1491,6 @@ static int ufs_qcom_mcq_config_resource(struct ufs_hba *hba)
> goto ioremap_err;
> }
>
> -out:
> - hba->mcq_base = res->base;
> - return 0;
> ioremap_err:
> res->base = NULL;
> remove_resource(res_mcq);

This patch changes the behavior for the success case without mentioning
this in the patch description. So I assume that the behavior change is
unintentional and hence that this patch should be dropped?

Bart.

2023-03-02 07:26:52

by Manivannan Sadhasivam

Subject: Re: [PATCH] ufs: host: ufs-qcom: Return directly if MCQ resource is provided in DT

On Wed, Mar 01, 2023 at 10:07:41AM -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 2/28/23 23:31, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> > Instead of using a goto label to return, let's return directly in the
> > "if" condition after setting mcq_base.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Manivannan Sadhasivam <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.c | 9 ++++-----
> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.c b/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.c
> > index 34fc453f3eb1..d90f963eed02 100644
> > --- a/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.c
> > +++ b/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.c
> > @@ -1460,8 +1460,10 @@ static int ufs_qcom_mcq_config_resource(struct ufs_hba *hba)
> > /* MCQ resource provided in DT */
> > res = &hba->res[RES_MCQ];
> > /* Bail if MCQ resource is provided */
> > - if (res->base)
> > - goto out;
> > + if (res->base) {
> > + hba->mcq_base = res->base;
> > + return 0;
> > + }
> > /* Explicitly allocate MCQ resource from ufs_mem */
> > res_mcq = devm_kzalloc(hba->dev, sizeof(*res_mcq), GFP_KERNEL);
> > @@ -1489,9 +1491,6 @@ static int ufs_qcom_mcq_config_resource(struct ufs_hba *hba)
> > goto ioremap_err;
> > }
> > -out:
> > - hba->mcq_base = res->base;
> > - return 0;
> > ioremap_err:
> > res->base = NULL;
> > remove_resource(res_mcq);
>
> This patch changes the behavior for the success case without mentioning this
> in the patch description. So I assume that the behavior change is
> unintentional and hence that this patch should be dropped?
>

Sorry, my bad here :( Please ignore this patch.

Thanks,
Mani

> Bart.

--
மணிவண்ணன் சதாசிவம்