On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 03:22:14PM +0100, Herve Codina wrote:
> The QMC HDLC driver provides support for HDLC using the QMC (QUICC
> Multichannel Controller) to transfer the HDLC data.

...

> +struct qmc_hdlc {
> +     struct device *dev;
> +     struct qmc_chan *qmc_chan;
> +     struct net_device *netdev;
> +     bool is_crc32;
> +     spinlock_t tx_lock; /* Protect tx descriptors */

Just wondering if above tx/rx descriptors should be aligned on a cacheline
for DMA?

> +     struct qmc_hdlc_desc tx_descs[8];
> +     unsigned int tx_out;
> +     struct qmc_hdlc_desc rx_descs[4];
> +};

...

> +#define QMC_HDLC_RX_ERROR_FLAGS (QMC_RX_FLAG_HDLC_OVF | \
> +                              QMC_RX_FLAG_HDLC_UNA | \
> +                              QMC_RX_FLAG_HDLC_ABORT | \
> +                              QMC_RX_FLAG_HDLC_CRC)

Wouldn't be slightly better to have it as

#define QMC_HDLC_RX_ERROR_FLAGS                         \
        (QMC_RX_FLAG_HDLC_OVF | QMC_RX_FLAG_HDLC_UNA |  \
         QMC_RX_FLAG_HDLC_CRC | QMC_RX_FLAG_HDLC_ABORT)

?

...

> +     ret = qmc_chan_write_submit(qmc_hdlc->qmc_chan, desc->dma_addr, 
> desc->dma_size,
> +                                 qmc_hdlc_xmit_complete, desc);
> +     if (ret) {

> +             dev_err(qmc_hdlc->dev, "qmc chan write returns %d\n", ret);
> +             dma_unmap_single(qmc_hdlc->dev, desc->dma_addr, desc->dma_size, 
> DMA_TO_DEVICE);
> +             return ret;

I would do other way around, i.e. release resource followed up by printing
a message. Printing a message is a slow operation and may prevent the (soon
freed) resources to be re-used earlier.

> +     }

...

> +     spin_lock_irqsave(&qmc_hdlc->tx_lock, flags);

Why not using cleanup.h from day 1?

> +end:

This label, in particular, will not be needed with above in place.

> +     spin_unlock_irqrestore(&qmc_hdlc->tx_lock, flags);
> +     return ret;
> +}

...

> +     /* Queue as many recv descriptors as possible */
> +     for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(qmc_hdlc->rx_descs); i++) {
> +             desc = &qmc_hdlc->rx_descs[i];
> +
> +             desc->netdev = netdev;
> +             ret = qmc_hdlc_recv_queue(qmc_hdlc, desc, 
> chan_param.hdlc.max_rx_buf_size);

> +             if (ret) {
> +                     if (ret == -EBUSY && i != 0)
> +                             break; /* We use all the QMC chan capability */
> +                     goto free_desc;
> +             }

Can be unfolded to

                if (ret == -EBUSY && i)
                        break; /* We use all the QMC chan capability */
                if (ret)
                        goto free_desc;

Easy to read and understand.

> +     }

...

> +static int qmc_hdlc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{

With

        struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;

the below code will be neater (see other comments for the examples).

> +     struct device_node *np = pdev->dev.of_node;

It is used only once, drop it (see below).

> +     struct qmc_hdlc *qmc_hdlc;
> +     struct qmc_chan_info info;
> +     hdlc_device *hdlc;
> +     int ret;
> +
> +     qmc_hdlc = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*qmc_hdlc), GFP_KERNEL);
> +     if (!qmc_hdlc)
> +             return -ENOMEM;
> +
> +     qmc_hdlc->dev = &pdev->dev;
> +     spin_lock_init(&qmc_hdlc->tx_lock);
> +
> +     qmc_hdlc->qmc_chan = devm_qmc_chan_get_bychild(qmc_hdlc->dev, np);

        qmc_hdlc->qmc_chan = devm_qmc_chan_get_bychild(dev, dev->of_node);

> +     if (IS_ERR(qmc_hdlc->qmc_chan)) {
> +             ret = PTR_ERR(qmc_hdlc->qmc_chan);
> +             return dev_err_probe(qmc_hdlc->dev, ret, "get QMC channel 
> failed\n");

                return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(qmc_hdlc->qmc_chan), "get QMC 
channel failed\n");

> +     }
> +
> +     ret = qmc_chan_get_info(qmc_hdlc->qmc_chan, &info);
> +     if (ret) {

> +             dev_err(qmc_hdlc->dev, "get QMC channel info failed %d\n", ret);
> +             return ret;

Why not using same message pattern everywhere, i.e. dev_err_probe()?

                return dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "get QMC channel info failed\n");

(and so on...)

> +     }
> +
> +     if (info.mode != QMC_HDLC) {
> +             dev_err(qmc_hdlc->dev, "QMC chan mode %d is not QMC_HDLC\n",
> +                     info.mode);
> +             return -EINVAL;
> +     }
> +
> +     qmc_hdlc->netdev = alloc_hdlcdev(qmc_hdlc);
> +     if (!qmc_hdlc->netdev) {

> +             dev_err(qmc_hdlc->dev, "failed to alloc hdlc dev\n");
> +             return -ENOMEM;

We do not issue a message for -ENOMEM.

> +     }
> +
> +     hdlc = dev_to_hdlc(qmc_hdlc->netdev);
> +     hdlc->attach = qmc_hdlc_attach;
> +     hdlc->xmit = qmc_hdlc_xmit;
> +     SET_NETDEV_DEV(qmc_hdlc->netdev, qmc_hdlc->dev);
> +     qmc_hdlc->netdev->tx_queue_len = ARRAY_SIZE(qmc_hdlc->tx_descs);
> +     qmc_hdlc->netdev->netdev_ops = &qmc_hdlc_netdev_ops;
> +     ret = register_hdlc_device(qmc_hdlc->netdev);
> +     if (ret) {
> +             dev_err(qmc_hdlc->dev, "failed to register hdlc device (%d)\n", 
> ret);
> +             goto free_netdev;
> +     }
> +
> +     platform_set_drvdata(pdev, qmc_hdlc);
> +
> +     return 0;
> +
> +free_netdev:
> +     free_netdev(qmc_hdlc->netdev);
> +     return ret;
> +}


-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko


Reply via email to