Hi Bin,
On Friday, 4 September 2015, Bin Meng <bmeng...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> When something goes wrong during device_probe(), we just need do
> device_remove() which calls device_free() internally.
>
> Signed-off-by: Bin Meng <bmeng...@gmail.com>
> ---
>
> drivers/core/device.c | 9 ++-------
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/core/device.c b/drivers/core/device.c
> index a6cd936..061a7ef 100644
> --- a/drivers/core/device.c
> +++ b/drivers/core/device.c
> @@ -316,19 +316,14 @@ int device_probe_child(struct udevice *dev, void
> *parent_priv)
>
> ret = uclass_post_probe_device(dev);
> if (ret)
> - goto fail_uclass;
> + goto fail;
>
> return 0;
> -fail_uclass:
> +fail:
> if (device_remove(dev)) {
> dm_warn("%s: Device '%s' failed to remove on error path\n",
> __func__, dev->name);
> }
> -fail:
> - dev->flags &= ~DM_FLAG_ACTIVATED;
> -
> - dev->seq = -1;
> - device_free(dev);
>
> return ret;
> }
The problem is that in this case you end up calling functions that
should not be called. For example uclass_pre_remove_device() will be
called even if uclass_post_probe_device() was not.
There is definitely room for improvement here - we could/should call
only those 'remove' functions that mirror the 'probe' ones we called.
But that is quite a lot of code for little benefit.
Regards,
Simon
>
>
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
