Re: [PATCH 2/6] firmware_class: Split _request_firmware() into threefunctions

[Stephen Boyd]

On 03/26/12 13:36, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday, March 26, 2012, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>> On 03/25/12 15:01, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>> @@ -639,8 +655,15 @@ static int request_firmware_work_func(vo
>>>  		return 0;
>>>  	}
>>>  
>>> -	ret = _request_firmware(&fw, fw_work->name, fw_work->device,
>>> +	ret = _request_firmware_prepare(&fw, fw_work->name, fw_work->device);
>>> +	if (ret <= 0)
>>> +		return ret;
>> This needs to jump to the cont function so that users know loading
>> failed or that the firmware was builtin.
> You're right, sorry.  That should have been
>
> 	if (ret > 0) {
> 		ret = _request_firmware(fw, fw_work->name, fw_work->device,
> 			fw_work->uevent, true);
> 		if (ret)
> 			_request_firmware_cleanup(&fw);
> 	}
>
> but actually using a jump makes the next patch look better.
>
> Updated patch is appended.
> ---
> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx>
> Subject: firmware_class: Split _request_firmware() into three functions, v2
>
> Split _request_firmware() into three functions,
> _request_firmware_prepare() doing preparatory work that need not be
> done under umhelper_sem, _request_firmware_cleanup() doing the
> post-error cleanup and _request_firmware() carrying out the remaining
> operations.
>
> This change is requisite for moving the acquisition of umhelper_sem
> from _request_firmware() to the callers, which is going to be done
> subsequently.

Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx>
> ---

-- 
Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/