Re: [PATCH v2] p54: Fix an error handling path in p54spi_probe()

From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
To: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr>
Cc: Christian Lamparter <chunkeey@gmail.com>,
	Kalle Valo <kvalo@kernel.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
	"John W. Linville" <linville@tuxdriver.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org,
	Christian Lamparter <chunkeey@web.de>,
	linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
	Netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] p54: Fix an error handling path in p54spi_probe()
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2022 10:25:05 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220614072505.GH2146@kadam> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f13c3976-2ba0-e16d-0853-5b5b1be16d11@wanadoo.fr>

On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 10:57:25PM +0200, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
> > > ---
> > > v2: reduce diffstat and take advantage on the fact that release_firmware()
> > > checks for NULL
> > 
> > Heh, ok ;) . Now that I see it,  the "ret = p54_parse_firmware(...); ... "
> > could have been replaced with "return p54_parse_firmware(dev, priv->firmware);"
> > so the p54spi.c could shrink another 5-6 lines.
> > 
> > I think leaving p54spi_request_firmware() callee to deal with
> > releasing the firmware
> > in the error case as well is nicer because it gets rid of a "but in
> > this case" complexity.
> 
> 
> Take the one you consider being the best one.
> 
> If it deserves a v3 to axe some lines of code, I can do it but, as said
> previously, v1 is for me the cleaner and more future proof.
> 

I prefered v1 but with s/firmaware/firmware/...

regards,
dan carpenter