Re: [PATCH v1 2/5] firmware: microchip: don't unconditionally print validation success

[Conor Dooley]

On Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 10:26:35PM +0200, Alexandre Ghiti wrote:
> Hi Conor,
> 
> On 10/04/2024 13:58, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > 
> > If validation fails, both prints are made. Skip the success one in the
> > failure case.
> > 
> > Fixes: ec5b0f1193ad ("firmware: microchip: add PolarFire SoC Auto Update support")
> > Signed-off-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >   drivers/firmware/microchip/mpfs-auto-update.c | 2 ++
> >   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/microchip/mpfs-auto-update.c b/drivers/firmware/microchip/mpfs-auto-update.c
> > index 33343e83373c..298ad21e139b 100644
> > --- a/drivers/firmware/microchip/mpfs-auto-update.c
> > +++ b/drivers/firmware/microchip/mpfs-auto-update.c
> > @@ -218,10 +218,12 @@ static int mpfs_auto_update_verify_image(struct fw_upload *fw_uploader)
> >   	if (ret | response->resp_status) {
> >   		dev_warn(priv->dev, "Verification of Upgrade Image failed!\n");
> >   		ret = ret ? ret : -EBADMSG;
> > +		goto free_message;
> >   	}
> >   	dev_info(priv->dev, "Verification of Upgrade Image passed!\n");
> > +free_message:
> >   	devm_kfree(priv->dev, message);
> >   free_response:
> >   	devm_kfree(priv->dev, response);
> 
> 
> This should go into -fixes, but not sure if you take care of this or if
> Palmer should, please let me know so that I can remove this from my list :)


Yea, probably this and "firmware: microchip: clarify that sizes and
addresses are in hex" should go on fixes. FYI, I usually set the
delegate on patchwork for things that I take to me, so generally you
should be able to tell from that.

Cheers,
Conor.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature