Re: [2/2] ethernet: ti: eliminated some duplicate code.

[Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>]

> Put the code that obtains device_node and the code that
> uses it tightly together to remove duplicate resource
> cleanup statements between them.

1. Would the wording “ethernet: ti: eliminate a bit of duplicate code in gbe_probe()”
   be more appropriate for the commit subject?

2. I find that such a change can be provided also without combining
   it into a patch series with only two update steps.
   Otherwise: Why did you omit the cover letter for the updates
              by this small patch series?


> @@ -3651,22 +3651,18 @@ static int gbe_probe(struct netcp_device *netcp_device, struct device *dev,
>  	if (ret)
>  		return ret;
>
> -	interfaces = of_get_child_by_name(node, "interfaces");
> -	if (!interfaces)
> -		dev_err(dev, "could not find interfaces\n");
> -
>  	ret = netcp_txpipe_init(&gbe_dev->tx_pipe, netcp_device,
>  				gbe_dev->dma_chan_name, gbe_dev->tx_queue_id);
> -	if (ret) {
> -		of_node_put(interfaces);
> +	if (ret)
>  		return ret;
> -	}
>
>  	ret = netcp_txpipe_open(&gbe_dev->tx_pipe);
> -	if (ret) {
> -		of_node_put(interfaces);
> +	if (ret)
>  		return ret;
> -	}
> +
> +	interfaces = of_get_child_by_name(node, "interfaces");
> +	if (!interfaces)
> +		dev_err(dev, "could not find interfaces\n");

3. Can this error message trigger any further software development considerations
   for the desired exception handling?


>
>  	/* Create network interfaces */
>  	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&gbe_dev->gbe_intf_head);


Regards,
Markus