On Sun, Feb 21, 2021 at 11:19:28AM +0100, Lino Sanfilippo wrote:

Hi,

On 19.02.21 at 10:13, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:

quoted

quoted

+	rc = cdev_device_add(&chip->cdevs, &chip->devs);
+	if (rc) {
+		dev_err(&chip->devs,
+			"unable to cdev_device_add() %s, major %d, minor %d, err=%d\n",
+			dev_name(&chip->devs), MAJOR(chip->devs.devt),
+			MINOR(chip->devs.devt), rc);
+		goto out_put_devs;
+	}
+
+	return 0;
+
+out_put_devs:

A nit:

1. You have already del_cdev:
2. Here you use a differing convention with out prefix.

I'd suggest that you put err_ to both:

1. err_del_cdev
2. err_put_devs

It's quite coherent what we have already:

linux-tpmdd on  next took 8s
❯ git grep "^err_.*" drivers/char/tpm/ |  wc -l
17

The label del_cdev is indeed a bit inconsistent with the rest of the code.
But AFAICS out_put_devs is not:
1. all labels in tpm2-space.c start with out_
2. there are more hits for out_ across the whole TPM code (i.e. with the same command
you used above I get 31 hits for _out) than for err_.

I suggest to rename del_cdev to something like out_del_cdev or maybe out_cdev which
seems to be even closer to the existing naming scheme for labels.

Generally, I'd prefer the following pattern:

out: /* out for success path if needed */

        return 0;

err_foo:

err_bar:

        return ret;

Existing naming scheme is not something to hang into, and I don't care
to preserve it.

Regards,
Lino

/Jarkko