Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <1cf4af9b-b40e-9e1a-47e4-40c6334fd410@linaro.org>
Date:   Tue, 20 Jun 2023 20:59:48 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.12.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH] soc: qcom: icc-bwmon: Don't ignore return values of
 regmap functions
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@kernel.org>
Cc:     Andy Gross <agross@kernel.org>,
        Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@somainline.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20230615-topic-bwmonretval-v1-1-223bd048ebf7@linaro.org>
 <3364339a-908d-7ab6-7d62-a05ab8e67739@linaro.org>
 <20230620181451.idesqpkdyb2wa65l@ripper>
 <3b1b7849-c116-a9da-5c5c-a520c10a521b@linaro.org>
From:   Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>
In-Reply-To: <3b1b7849-c116-a9da-5c5c-a520c10a521b@linaro.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 20.06.2023 20:15, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 20/06/2023 20:14, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 15, 2023 at 11:26:13PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 15/06/2023 23:12, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>>>> As it turns out, not all regmap accesses succeed. Not knowing this is
>>>> particularly suboptimal when there's a breaking change to the regmap
>>>> APIs. Monitor the return values of regmap_ calls and propagate errors,
>>>> should any occur.
>>>>
>>>> To keep any level of readability in bwmon_enable(), add some comments
>>>> to separate the logical blocks.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>
>>>
>>> Nice coincidence, I just had some talks with a friend about uselessness
>>> (IMHO) of regmap MMIO return status checks.
>>>
>>> Sorry, for me most of this makes the code difficult to read for no gain.
>>> Errors are not real. This is some artificial problem. Solving it makes
>>> code less maintainable.
>>>
>>> If we used here readl/writel, you would not add any checks, right? Then
>>> don't add for regmap mmio.
>>>
>>
>> I agree, the mmio regmap interface should only fail because of bugs or
>> things are misconfigured. Would be nice to capture that in a WARN_ON()
>> or something...
>>
> 
> One choice could be to have for entire functions doing reads/writes:
> 
> 	ret = 0;
> 	ret != regmap_write();
> 	ret != regmap_write();
> 	ret != regmap_write();
> 	return ret;
> 
> and handle this in the caller somehow. I don't think that aborting such
> chain early, just because regmap mmio failures, makes sense.
Meh, perhaps let's just forget about this patch.

Konrad
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>