Re: [PATCH V4 1/6] SLIMbus: Device management on SLIMbus

[Mark Brown]

On Sat, Feb 06, 2016 at 11:44:20AM -0700, Sagar Dharia wrote:

> +static void schedule_slim_report(struct slim_controller *ctrl,
> +				 struct slim_device *sb, bool report)
> +{
> +	struct sb_report_wd *sbw;
> +
> +	dev_dbg(&ctrl->dev, "report:%d for slave:%s\n", report, sb->name);
> +
> +	sbw = kmalloc(sizeof(*sbw), GFP_KERNEL);
> +	if (!sbw)
> +		return;
> +
> +	INIT_WORK(&sbw->wd, slim_report);
> +	sbw->sb = sb;
> +	sbw->report = report;
> +	if (!queue_work(ctrl->wq, &sbw->wd)) {
> +		dev_err(&ctrl->dev, "failed to queue report:%d slave:%s\n",
> +				    report, sb->name);
> +		kfree(sbw);
> +	}
> +}

I'm not 100% clear why we're scheduling this into a workqueue, it'd
probably help to at least explain what's going on in the code for future
reference.

> +}
> +/**

There's an awful lot of places in this which look like they're missing
blank lines.

> +ret_assigned_laddr:
> +	mutex_unlock(&ctrl->m_ctrl);
> +	if (exists || ret)
> +		return ret;
> +
> +	pr_info("setting slimbus l-addr:%x, ea:%x,%x,%x,%x\n",
> +		*laddr, e_addr->manf_id, e_addr->prod_code,
> +		e_addr->dev_index, e_addr->instance);

Not a dev_ print?

> +	slim = slim_query_device(ctrl, e_addr);
> +	if (!slim) {
> +		ret = -ENOMEM;

-ENOMEM?

> +static void __exit slimbus_exit(void)
> +{
> +	bus_unregister(&slimbus_type);
> +}
> +
> +static int __init slimbus_init(void)
> +{
> +	return bus_register(&slimbus_type);
> +}
> +postcore_initcall(slimbus_init);
> +module_exit(slimbus_exit);

Put the annotatations next to their functions.

> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Slimbus module");
> +MODULE_ALIAS("platform:slimbus");

This isn't a platform driver, it shouldn't have this alias.

> diff --git a/include/linux/slimbus.h b/include/linux/slimbus.h
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..2a78f79
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/include/linux/slimbus.h

Probably good to add a module_slimbus_device() macro like other buses
have.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature