From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Delivery-date: Thu, 26 Jan 2023 10:09:23 +0100 Received: from metis.ext.pengutronix.de ([2001:67c:670:201:290:27ff:fe1d:cc33]) by lore.white.stw.pengutronix.de with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1pKyG5-002WXn-6z for lore@lore.pengutronix.de; Thu, 26 Jan 2023 10:09:23 +0100 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([2607:7c80:54:3::133]) by metis.ext.pengutronix.de with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1pKyG2-0004pq-Al for lore@pengutronix.de; Thu, 26 Jan 2023 10:09:22 +0100 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=cOiXe0SX9dOcnXLaTZX5pmKWwWNi9MMRLkD7uafQHm0=; b=ArA3CGDn5tz8AyGbjCrftzjclZ pUuqzEFlW39zOznGnFnfFYcytmr2eo6BR0z7uwK3xJXuMAlr97Cyt+JGrgX0r+V41VAw4/mhAcVGs BN5m6P0cByrorjqdvK4mO5LNDBpqsPgrvZpmXseRdT13344lTDAK8Ni7sC/8GcomeQEGKgxxDCF2Z ZaLjjWHpt4lIIGUT3BYt5Gh7WF1PI8dVXKrh3KXLv0/SmOKe6LGGAqGumF6qg74/v0VYlIg2tRTci G+PEsKIkfkj5DAi4dShkUvDAiXz76ty+OgNLphRN4kEt3ax+mI+qAfjPq1OkDjK0TwKu9gNev/7jk V1JlzElw==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1pKyEc-00AEUv-1j; Thu, 26 Jan 2023 09:07:54 +0000 Received: from metis.ext.pengutronix.de ([2001:67c:670:201:290:27ff:fe1d:cc33]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1pKyEV-00AET9-Vc for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 26 Jan 2023 09:07:49 +0000 Received: from ptx.hi.pengutronix.de ([2001:67c:670:100:1d::c0]) by metis.ext.pengutronix.de with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1pKyEU-0004R0-FX; Thu, 26 Jan 2023 10:07:46 +0100 Received: from mfe by ptx.hi.pengutronix.de with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1pKyET-00082H-7n; Thu, 26 Jan 2023 10:07:45 +0100 Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2023 10:07:45 +0100 From: Marco Felsch To: John Watts Cc: barebox@lists.infradead.org Message-ID: <20230126090745.rpgjxltmhvw4jod5@pengutronix.de> References: <20230122175141.119834-1-contact@jookia.org> <20230125164230.2328043-4-contact@jookia.org> <20230125200714.cxpg572weivxjeam@pengutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716 X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20230126_010748_033416_3B7A6687 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 22.80 ) X-BeenThere: barebox@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "barebox" X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 2607:7c80:54:3::133 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: barebox-bounces+lore=pengutronix.de@lists.infradead.org X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on metis.ext.pengutronix.de X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.7 required=4.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] ARM: novena: Read Ethernet MAC address from EEPROM X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 08 May 2019 21:11:16 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on metis.ext.pengutronix.de) Hi John, On 23-01-26, John Watts wrote: > On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 09:07:14PM +0100, Marco Felsch wrote: > > > + rc = read_file_2("/dev/eeprom0", &read, &eeprom, max); > > > > You never free the eeprom buffer. > > Argh, I explicitly remember writing down that I need to do this then promptly > got distracted when searching for the correct free function to use. > > > > + > > > + if (rc < 0 && rc != -EFBIG) { > > > + pr_err("Unable to read Novena EEPROM: %s\n", strerror(-rc)); > > > + return NULL; ... > > > static int novena_probe(struct device *dev) > > > { > > > + novena_try_eeprom(); > > > > It's not wrong to move it into a sub-function but IMO at least this > > function can be part of the probe() function. Also I would do the > > device_ensured_probe function here and just have one function which I > > would call: novena_set_mac(). This way it's a bit easier to follow the > > code. But that's just my oppinion. > > I'm not quite sure what you mean, could you provide an example? I meant that the content of novena_try_eeprom() can be part of the probe() function :) Furthermore I mean that having to much sub-functions isn't really helpful, but that is just my oppinion. Regards, Marco