Received: by 2002:a25:1985:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id 127csp3276189ybz; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 13:10:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypLuJQhnCfMKcdzZ4treoO56JOaZh7ZJr28UHfQbPXL3pSqye/6dhtBqSKG3hhe1psgncZFp X-Received: by 2002:a50:f0dc:: with SMTP id a28mr18935897edm.87.1588018219911; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 13:10:19 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1588018219; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=pE99SLHp+yC2w7VcRjbtcdKQbY1wlKboA8WDTB6pPgR9BhknH8n400lOnBNuNAozRm dwlYgMiZaxC4awXcnn8D/IIMAEOFpdh5frrWDrCh9peY/8QvN4dEzJg0NJ2J6wQRuhf4 GAbYXfhLO8Zo/q4NWSl0V9yDDnLmgQm/iB8YP+e1N3vSuTb6XVremJORvljPqgSF0BAS 0VYuuvfFapvV0+beoE254qf+JoeCbG3jk7rl5N4Nzwo2qvMC76n7FZogxkmzXyiJ8LmT oTy4lhKuwjHhbcCw/IaHk/sK/JNGWQFiulvhBCdWUoO2n5vIsQigfQMUTWRoKuRN/K08 gE1Q== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :organization:references:in-reply-to:message-id:subject:cc:to:from :date; bh=61J5Q7KIRAX1/DmSKgvNKN7s1RdQEE/B5SFYsVzcpCg=; b=XzbMoUvKilBjC5e5M7fQfZFsTJMSIvPGf/1JwRbXm0Lom/HhCgUfqjRQLZ/HBskjFY NGBbwYBxL+8Vyk9mqdCwr4jsXqkB5ktOn5r9b3kGE3dEB6BJgn8orYcnp303rEdtGWqr W34+bT6bpoEkLHhB0N3ohdr0QLRkn92tRK8sqLlaJsA+EYKyQm8e7yhk4LHzoDWsjkbI OUdjjI0JUZjdAZiGx9m5W50K0J4nZPl2QwdfF8526RuU1e2Ujjv8S0H259cQT5Eni/tM zcX+ju/yQoRSpW/vkcnmdzOoqGdIiqGk8ScOsRk6FV3sWkovqsVR018iqUGOfIYagH5A 8F3g== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id dh23si401200edb.223.2020.04.27.13.09.56; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 13:10:19 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726738AbgD0UIN convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 27 Apr 2020 16:08:13 -0400 Received: from relay11.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.178.231]:53829 "EHLO relay11.mail.gandi.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725919AbgD0UIM (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Apr 2020 16:08:12 -0400 Received: from xps13 (unknown [91.224.148.103]) (Authenticated sender: miquel.raynal@bootlin.com) by relay11.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E1666100003; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 20:08:07 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2020 22:08:06 +0200 From: Miquel Raynal To: Marek Vasut Cc: Christophe Kerello , richard@nod.at, vigneshr@ti.com, lee.jones@linaro.org, robh+dt@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com, tony@atomide.com, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/12] mtd: rawnand: stm32_fmc2: manage all errors cases at probe time Message-ID: <20200427220806.13741ec0@xps13> In-Reply-To: <3527f3b8-225d-6e5a-dd8a-0421d475f70b@denx.de> References: <1586966256-29548-1-git-send-email-christophe.kerello@st.com> <1586966256-29548-5-git-send-email-christophe.kerello@st.com> <20200427194747.224a2402@xps13> <40a9bac7-9ed4-b781-f2c2-2d90b4e82749@denx.de> <20200427200848.722f4c56@xps13> <3527f3b8-225d-6e5a-dd8a-0421d475f70b@denx.de> Organization: Bootlin X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.4 (GTK+ 2.24.32; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Marek, Marek Vasut wrote on Mon, 27 Apr 2020 21:46:44 +0200: > On 4/27/20 8:08 PM, Miquel Raynal wrote: > [...] > >>>> /* FMC2 init routine */ > >>>> stm32_fmc2_init(fmc2); > >>>> @@ -1997,7 +2001,7 @@ static int stm32_fmc2_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > >>>> /* Scan to find existence of the device */ > >>>> ret = nand_scan(chip, nand->ncs); > >>>> if (ret) > >>>> - goto err_scan; > >>>> + goto err_dma_setup; > >>>> > >>>> ret = mtd_device_register(mtd, NULL, 0); > >>>> if (ret) > >>>> @@ -2010,7 +2014,7 @@ static int stm32_fmc2_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > >>>> err_device_register: > >>>> nand_cleanup(chip); > >>>> > >>>> -err_scan: > >>>> +err_dma_setup: > >>>> if (fmc2->dma_ecc_ch) > >>>> dma_release_channel(fmc2->dma_ecc_ch); > >>>> if (fmc2->dma_tx_ch) > >>>> @@ -2021,6 +2025,7 @@ static int stm32_fmc2_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > >>>> sg_free_table(&fmc2->dma_data_sg); > >>>> sg_free_table(&fmc2->dma_ecc_sg); > >>>> > >>>> +err_clk_disable: > >>>> clk_disable_unprepare(fmc2->clk); > >>>> > >>>> return ret; > >>> > >>> I didn't spot it during my earlier reviews but I really prefer using > >>> labels explaining what you do than having the same name of the function > >>> which failed. This way you don't have to rework the error path when > >>> you handle an additional error. > >>> > >>> So, would you mind doing this in two steps: > >>> > >>> 1/ > >>> Replace > >>> > >>> err_scan: > >>> > >>> with, eg. > >>> > >>> release_dma_objs: > >> > >> The ^err_ prefix in failpath labels is useful, since it's easily > >> possible to match on it with regexes ; not so much on arbitrary label name. > > > > I guess so, but is it actually useful to catch labels in a regex? (real > > question) > > I find it useful to have a unified way to find those labels, e.g. > err_because_foo: > err_because_bar: > err_last_one: > is much nicer than: > foo_failed: > bar_also_failed: > its_total_randomness: My point being, Christophe, you can use err_ as a prefix but I think it's better to use: err_do_this_cleanup than err_this_failed > > > Any way I suppose catching ":\n" is already a good approximation to > > find labels? > > Not very practical with git grep (^err.*: works nicely though) I suppose ^.*:$ would work the same ;) > > >> btw would it make sense to split the first three patches of this series > >> into a separate series ? This rawnand part seems more like an unrelated > >> cleanup. > > > > As it seems that the MFD discussion can take longer, then I would say > > yes, at least for the cleanup/misc changes part. > Right > Cheers, Miquèl