On 4/27/20 7:47 PM, Miquel Raynal wrote: > Hi Christophe, > > Christophe Kerello <christophe.kerello@xxxxxx> wrote on Wed, 15 Apr > 2020 17:57:28 +0200: > >> This patch defers its probe when the expected reset control is not >> yet ready. This patch also handles properly all errors cases at probe >> time. >> >> Signed-off-by: Christophe Kerello <christophe.kerello@xxxxxx> >> --- >> drivers/mtd/nand/raw/stm32_fmc2_nand.c | 13 +++++++++---- >> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/stm32_fmc2_nand.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/stm32_fmc2_nand.c >> index b6d45cd..0a96797 100644 >> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/stm32_fmc2_nand.c >> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/stm32_fmc2_nand.c >> @@ -1967,7 +1967,11 @@ static int stm32_fmc2_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >> } >> >> rstc = devm_reset_control_get(dev, NULL); >> - if (!IS_ERR(rstc)) { >> + if (IS_ERR(rstc)) { >> + ret = PTR_ERR(rstc); >> + if (ret == -EPROBE_DEFER) >> + goto err_clk_disable; >> + } else { >> reset_control_assert(rstc); >> reset_control_deassert(rstc); >> } >> @@ -1975,7 +1979,7 @@ static int stm32_fmc2_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >> /* DMA setup */ >> ret = stm32_fmc2_dma_setup(fmc2); >> if (ret) >> - return ret; >> + goto err_dma_setup; >> >> /* 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. 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. ______________________________________________________ Linux MTD discussion mailing list http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/