[PATCH 0/5] powerpc/platforms/4xx: Adjustments for six function implementations

From: Markus Elfring <redacted>
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 18:48:28 +0100

A few update suggestions were taken into account
from static source code analysis.

Markus Elfring (5):
  Combine four seq_printf() calls into two in ocm_debugfs_show()
  Use seq_putc() in ocm_debugfs_show()
  Delete an error message for a failed memory allocation in three functions
  Improve a size determination in two functions
  Delete an unnecessary return statement in two functions

 arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/msi.c |  7 +++----
 arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/ocm.c | 19 +++++--------------
 arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/pci.c |  1 -
 3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)

-- 
2.15.1

From: Markus Elfring <redacted>
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 18:08:08 +0100

Some data were printed into a sequence by four separate function calls.
Print the same data by two single function calls instead.

This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software.

Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <redacted>
---
 arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/ocm.c | 8 ++------
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/ocm.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/ocm.c
index 85d9e37f5ccb..5bc1baf809d1 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/ocm.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/ocm.c

@@ -245,9 +245,7 @@ static int ocm_debugfs_show(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
 		seq_printf(m, "PhysAddr     : 0x%llx\n", ocm->phys);
 		seq_printf(m, "MemTotal     : %d Bytes\n", ocm->memtotal);
 		seq_printf(m, "MemTotal(NC) : %d Bytes\n", ocm->nc.memtotal);
-		seq_printf(m, "MemTotal(C)  : %d Bytes\n", ocm->c.memtotal);
-
-		seq_printf(m, "\n");
+		seq_printf(m, "MemTotal(C)  : %d Bytes\n\n", ocm->c.memtotal);
 
 		seq_printf(m, "NC.PhysAddr  : 0x%llx\n", ocm->nc.phys);
 		seq_printf(m, "NC.VirtAddr  : 0x%p\n", ocm->nc.virt);

@@ -259,9 +257,7 @@ static int ocm_debugfs_show(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
 							blk->size, blk->owner);
 		}
 
-		seq_printf(m, "\n");
-
-		seq_printf(m, "C.PhysAddr   : 0x%llx\n", ocm->c.phys);
+		seq_printf(m, "\nC.PhysAddr   : 0x%llx\n", ocm->c.phys);
 		seq_printf(m, "C.VirtAddr   : 0x%p\n", ocm->c.virt);
 		seq_printf(m, "C.MemTotal   : %d Bytes\n", ocm->c.memtotal);
 		seq_printf(m, "C.MemFree    : %d Bytes\n", ocm->c.memfree);

-- 
2.15.1

From: Markus Elfring <redacted>
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 18:10:02 +0100

A single character (line break) should be put into a sequence.
Thus use the corresponding function "seq_putc".

This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software.

Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <redacted>
---
 arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/ocm.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/ocm.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/ocm.c
index 5bc1baf809d1..8cb601e8bed7 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/ocm.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/ocm.c

@@ -267,7 +267,7 @@ static int ocm_debugfs_show(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
 						blk->size, blk->owner);
 		}
 
-		seq_printf(m, "\n");
+		seq_putc(m, '\n');
 	}
 
 	return 0;

-- 
2.15.1

From: Markus Elfring <redacted>
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 18:28:54 +0100

Omit an extra message for a memory allocation failure in these functions.

This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software.

Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <redacted>
---
 arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/msi.c | 5 ++---
 arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/ocm.c | 5 +----
 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/msi.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/msi.c
index d50417e23add..d16b81303cb0 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/msi.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/msi.c

@@ -224,10 +224,9 @@ static int ppc4xx_msi_probe(struct platform_device *dev)
 	dev_dbg(&dev->dev, "PCIE-MSI: Setting up MSI support...\n");
 
 	msi = kzalloc(sizeof(struct ppc4xx_msi), GFP_KERNEL);
-	if (!msi) {
-		dev_err(&dev->dev, "No memory for MSI structure\n");
+	if (!msi)
 		return -ENOMEM;
-	}
+
 	dev->dev.platform_data = msi;
 
 	/* Get MSI ranges */

diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/ocm.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/ocm.c
index 8cb601e8bed7..5a750d0ad446 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/ocm.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/ocm.c

@@ -337,7 +337,6 @@ void *ppc4xx_ocm_alloc(phys_addr_t *phys, int size, int align,
 
 		ocm_blk = kzalloc(sizeof(struct ocm_block), GFP_KERNEL);
 		if (!ocm_blk) {
-			printk(KERN_ERR "PPC4XX OCM: could not allocate ocm block");
 			rh_free(ocm_reg->rh, offset);
 			break;
 		}

@@ -391,10 +390,8 @@ static int __init ppc4xx_ocm_init(void)
 		return 0;
 
 	ocm_nodes = kzalloc((count * sizeof(struct ocm_info)), GFP_KERNEL);
-	if (!ocm_nodes) {
-		printk(KERN_ERR "PPC4XX OCM: failed to allocate OCM nodes!\n");
+	if (!ocm_nodes)
 		return -ENOMEM;
-	}
 
 	ocm_count = count;
 	count = 0;

-- 
2.15.1

From: Markus Elfring <redacted>
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 18:40:23 +0100

The script "checkpatch.pl" pointed information out like the following.

WARNING: void function return statements are not generally useful

Thus remove such a statement in the affected functions.

Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <redacted>
---
 arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/ocm.c | 2 --
 arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/pci.c | 1 -
 2 files changed, 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/ocm.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/ocm.c
index 11418f090bf4..aee5f041ff14 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/ocm.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/ocm.c

@@ -226,8 +226,6 @@ static void __init ocm_init_node(int count, struct device_node *node)
 	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&ocm->c.list);
 
 	ocm->ready = 1;
-
-	return;
 }
 
 static int ocm_debugfs_show(struct seq_file *m, void *v)

diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/pci.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/pci.c
index 73e6b36bcd51..b73ea8f4be1f 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/pci.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/pci.c

@@ -1399,7 +1399,6 @@ static void __init ppc_476fpe_pciex_check_link(struct ppc4xx_pciex_port *port)
 		printk(KERN_WARNING "PCIE%d: Link up failed\n", port->index);
 
 	iounmap(mbase);
-	return;
 }
 
 static struct ppc4xx_pciex_hwops ppc_476fpe_pcie_hwops __initdata =

-- 
2.15.1

From: Markus Elfring <redacted>
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 18:32:33 +0100

Replace the specification of data structures by pointer dereferences
as the parameter for the operator "sizeof" to make the corresponding size
determination a bit safer according to the Linux coding style convention.

This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software.

Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <redacted>
---
 arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/msi.c | 2 +-
 arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/ocm.c | 2 +-
 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/msi.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/msi.c
index d16b81303cb0..f693cab07752 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/msi.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/msi.c

@@ -223,7 +223,7 @@ static int ppc4xx_msi_probe(struct platform_device *dev)
 
 	dev_dbg(&dev->dev, "PCIE-MSI: Setting up MSI support...\n");
 
-	msi = kzalloc(sizeof(struct ppc4xx_msi), GFP_KERNEL);
+	msi = kzalloc(sizeof(*msi), GFP_KERNEL);
 	if (!msi)
 		return -ENOMEM;
 

diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/ocm.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/ocm.c
index 5a750d0ad446..11418f090bf4 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/ocm.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/4xx/ocm.c

@@ -335,7 +335,7 @@ void *ppc4xx_ocm_alloc(phys_addr_t *phys, int size, int align,
 		if (IS_ERR_VALUE(offset))
 			continue;
 
-		ocm_blk = kzalloc(sizeof(struct ocm_block), GFP_KERNEL);
+		ocm_blk = kzalloc(sizeof(*ocm_blk), GFP_KERNEL);
 		if (!ocm_blk) {
 			rh_free(ocm_reg->rh, offset);
 			break;

-- 
2.15.1

On Thu, 2018-01-11 at 18:01:33 UTC, SF Markus Elfring wrote:

From: Markus Elfring <redacted>
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 18:10:02 +0100

A single character (line break) should be put into a sequence.
Thus use the corresponding function "seq_putc".

This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software.

Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <redacted>

Applied to powerpc next, thanks.

https://git.kernel.org/powerpc/c/52930bc6e87191af3894bec302774f

cheers

On Thu, 2018-01-11 at 18:02:45 UTC, SF Markus Elfring wrote:

From: Markus Elfring <redacted>
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 18:28:54 +0100

Omit an extra message for a memory allocation failure in these functions.

This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software.

Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <redacted>

Applied to powerpc next, thanks.

https://git.kernel.org/powerpc/c/a8d5dadae59f5866ac3b68cb993d53

cheers

On Thu, 2018-01-11 at 18:04:54 UTC, SF Markus Elfring wrote:

From: Markus Elfring <redacted>
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 18:40:23 +0100

The script "checkpatch.pl" pointed information out like the following.

WARNING: void function return statements are not generally useful

Thus remove such a statement in the affected functions.

Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <redacted>

Applied to powerpc next, thanks.

https://git.kernel.org/powerpc/c/ae6263cc33742d1c179510b6aadd31

cheers

On Thu, 2018-01-11 at 18:00:33 UTC, SF Markus Elfring wrote:

From: Markus Elfring <redacted>
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 18:08:08 +0100

Some data were printed into a sequence by four separate function calls.
Print the same data by two single function calls instead.

This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software.

Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <redacted>

Applied to powerpc next, thanks.

https://git.kernel.org/powerpc/c/b52106a040e6f86848b05be1b43174

cheers