Re: [PATCH net-next v3 3/5] net: pcs: qcom-ipq9574: Add PCS instantiation and phylink operations

[Manikanta Mylavarapu]

On 12/24/2024 12:45 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 24, 2024 at 12:29:56PM +0530, Manikanta Mylavarapu wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 12/16/2024 7:10 PM, Lei Wei wrote:
>>> This patch adds the following PCS functionality for the PCS driver
>>> for IPQ9574 SoC:
>>>
>>> a.) Parses PCS MII DT nodes and instantiate each MII PCS instance.
>>> b.) Exports PCS instance get and put APIs. The network driver calls
>>> the PCS get API to get and associate the PCS instance with the port
>>> MAC.
>>> c.) PCS phylink operations for SGMII/QSGMII interface modes.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Lei Wei <quic_leiwei@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/net/pcs/pcs-qcom-ipq9574.c   | 463 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>  include/linux/pcs/pcs-qcom-ipq9574.h |  16 ++
>>>  2 files changed, 479 insertions(+)
>>>
> 
>>> +
>>> +/* Parse the PCS MII DT nodes which are child nodes of the PCS node,
>>> + * and instantiate each MII PCS instance.
>>> + */
>>> +static int ipq_pcs_create_miis(struct ipq_pcs *qpcs)
>>> +{
>>> +	struct device *dev = qpcs->dev;
>>> +	struct ipq_pcs_mii *qpcs_mii;
>>> +	struct device_node *mii_np;
>>> +	u32 index;
>>> +	int ret;
>>> +
>>> +	for_each_available_child_of_node(dev->of_node, mii_np) {
>>> +		ret = of_property_read_u32(mii_np, "reg", &index);
>>> +		if (ret) {
>>> +			dev_err(dev, "Failed to read MII index\n");
>>> +			of_node_put(mii_np);
>>
>> Assume, the second child node failed here.
>> Returning without calling the first child node of_node_put().
>>
>> Please clear the previous child nodes resources before return.
> 
> s/clear child nodes/put OF nodes/
> 
> Note, for_each_available_child_of_node() handles refcounting for
> the nodes that we looped through. So, I don't think the comment is
> valid. If I missed something, please expand your comment.
> 

Yes, you are correct. for_each_available_child_of_node() handles the
refcount. I am dropping my comment.

> P.S. Please also trim your messages. There is no need to resend the
> whole patch if you are commenting a single function.
> 

Got it. Thank you for your input.

Thanks & Regards,
Manikanta.