.../net/ethernet/freescale/fman/fman_dtsec.c | 19 +++++++++++-------- 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
From: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2024 14:05:25 +0100
Adjust jump targets so that a bit of exception handling can be better
reused at the end of this function implementation.
Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
---
.../net/ethernet/freescale/fman/fman_dtsec.c | 19 +++++++++++--------
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/fman/fman_dtsec.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/fman/fman_dtsec.c
index 3088da7adf0f..1de22400fd89 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/fman/fman_dtsec.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/fman/fman_dtsec.c
@@ -1279,9 +1279,8 @@ static int dtsec_init(struct fman_mac *dtsec)
dtsec->max_speed, dtsec->addr, dtsec->exceptions,
dtsec->tbidev->addr);
if (err) {
- free_init_resources(dtsec);
pr_err("DTSEC version doesn't support this i/f mode\n");
- return err;
+ goto free_resources;
}
/* Configure the TBI PHY Control Register */
@@ -1296,23 +1295,21 @@ static int dtsec_init(struct fman_mac *dtsec)
err = fman_set_mac_max_frame(dtsec->fm, dtsec->mac_id, max_frm_ln);
if (err) {
pr_err("Setting max frame length failed\n");
- free_init_resources(dtsec);
- return -EINVAL;
+ err = -EINVAL;
+ goto free_resources;
}
dtsec->multicast_addr_hash =
alloc_hash_table(EXTENDED_HASH_TABLE_SIZE);
if (!dtsec->multicast_addr_hash) {
- free_init_resources(dtsec);
pr_err("MC hash table is failed\n");
- return -ENOMEM;
+ goto e_nomem;
}
dtsec->unicast_addr_hash = alloc_hash_table(DTSEC_HASH_TABLE_SIZE);
if (!dtsec->unicast_addr_hash) {
- free_init_resources(dtsec);
pr_err("UC hash table is failed\n");
- return -ENOMEM;
+ goto e_nomem;
}
/* register err intr handler for dtsec to FPM (err) */
@@ -1326,6 +1323,12 @@ static int dtsec_init(struct fman_mac *dtsec)
dtsec->dtsec_drv_param = NULL;
return 0;
+
+e_nomem:
+ err = -ENOMEM;
+free_resources:
+ free_init_resources(dtsec);
+ return err;
}
static int dtsec_free(struct fman_mac *dtsec)
--
2.43.2
On Tue, 27 Feb 2024 14:14:52 +0100 Markus Elfring wrote: > Adjust jump targets so that a bit of exception handling can be better > reused at the end of this function implementation. Okay, but.. > .../net/ethernet/freescale/fman/fman_dtsec.c | 19 +++++++++++-------- > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) ..you've added more lines than you've removed so what's the point. -- pw-bot: reject
>> Adjust jump targets so that a bit of exception handling can be better >> reused at the end of this function implementation. > > Okay, but.. > >> .../net/ethernet/freescale/fman/fman_dtsec.c | 19 +++++++++++-------- >> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > > ..you've added more lines than you've removed so what's the point. * Can the change acceptance grow any more for attempts to improve error handling another bit? * Would you like to fiddle with scope-based resource management? https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.8-rc6/source/include/linux/cleanup.h#L8 See also: Article by Jonathan Corbet from 2023-06-15 https://lwn.net/Articles/934679/ > -- > pw-bot: reject Can such an reaction be reconsidered once more? Regards, Markus
Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 03:46:57AM CET, kuba@kernel.org wrote: >On Tue, 27 Feb 2024 14:14:52 +0100 Markus Elfring wrote: >> Adjust jump targets so that a bit of exception handling can be better >> reused at the end of this function implementation. > >Okay, but.. > >> .../net/ethernet/freescale/fman/fman_dtsec.c | 19 +++++++++++-------- >> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > >..you've added more lines than you've removed so what's the point. To have cleaner error path? Not always lines of code is the correct indicator of patch quality :) >-- >pw-bot: reject >
On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 08:51:49AM +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote: > Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 03:46:57AM CET, kuba@kernel.org wrote: > >On Tue, 27 Feb 2024 14:14:52 +0100 Markus Elfring wrote: > >> Adjust jump targets so that a bit of exception handling can be better > >> reused at the end of this function implementation. > > > >Okay, but.. > > > >> .../net/ethernet/freescale/fman/fman_dtsec.c | 19 +++++++++++-------- > >> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > > > >..you've added more lines than you've removed so what's the point. > > To have cleaner error path? Not always lines of code is the correct > indicator of patch quality :) > I really don't like those goto e_nomem type of things. When you're laddering gotos you should do that kind of thing before the gotos so that when people add new gotos it doesn't make a mess. It's the same for unlocks, do that before the goto unless it matches a lock at the very start of the function. Or if you're doing a goto from inside a loop then clean up the partial iteration through the loop before the goto. regards, dan carpenter
Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 02:14:52PM CET, Markus.Elfring@web.de wrote: >From: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net> >Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2024 14:05:25 +0100 > >Adjust jump targets so that a bit of exception handling can be better >reused at the end of this function implementation. > >Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net> Reviewed-by: Jiri Pirko <jiri@nvidia.com> Nit, next time please indicate the target tree in the patch subject prefix: [patch net-next] xxx
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.