> > Please use "release_dma:" variant that I suggested in the comment to v14 because: > > > > > 1) It's just a good (and common-style in kernel) tone to unwind errors handling in the opposite order, it makes code more straight forward and helps to avoid silly mistakes. > > > > 2) It keeps the current code consistent in regards to probe error-handling. > > > > Can move tegra_i2c_release_dma under the same disable_div_clk label before clk_disable > > Order in probe is clk_prepare i2c_runtime_resume clk_enable in case of multimaster mode i2c_init_dma > > unwinding should be order is release_dma disable_div_clk disable_rpm unprepared > > Probe failure from tegra_i2c_init_dma, tegra_i2c_init, devm_request_irq, i2c_add_numbered_adapter all of them perform goto disable_div_clk > > I can add tegra_i2c_release_dma before performing clock disable under same disable_div_clk so all existing disable_div_clk labels remain same. > Otherwise adding new label release_dma causes all goto disable_div_clk statement also to be changed but its same as adding release_dma under disable_div_clk above the clk_disable. > OK, please ignore above. will add release_dma to show explicitly for readability. With release_dma all error handlers performing disable_clk_div need to go thru release dma and disable_clk_div label is not needed. So having release dma under disable_clk before clk_disable function is also same. Please confirm if this is ok to use same disable_div_clk or do you prefer release_dma label removing disable_div_clk > > > > > > disable_rpm: > > > pm_runtime_disable(&pdev->dev); > > > > > > [snip] > > > > Please also address my comment to the "fix maximum transfer size" patch. And please add Wolfram Sang to the CC list. > > > > Looks like v16 should be the final, so with everything being addressed: > > > > Reviewed-by: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@xxxxxxxxx> > > Tested-by: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@xxxxxxxxx>
