Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 12/19] remoteproc: core: Add vdev support and force mode to resource amending function | From | loic pallardy <> | Date | Thu, 8 Sep 2016 15:11:42 +0200 |
| |
On 09/08/2016 01:02 PM, Lee Jones wrote: > On Thu, 08 Sep 2016, loic pallardy wrote: > >> >> >> On 09/08/2016 10:48 AM, Lee Jones wrote: >>> On Wed, 31 Aug 2016, Loic Pallardy wrote: >>> >>>> This patch proposes diverse updates to rproc_update_resource_table_entry >>>> function: >>>> - rename rproc_update_resource_table_entry to __update_rsc_tbl_entry to >>>> have shorter function name. >>>> - add RSC_VDEV support >>>> - add force mode resource even if resource already fixed on firmware side. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Loic Pallardy <loic.pallardy@st.com> >>>> --- >>>> drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++++----- >>>> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c >>>> index 30e9c70..aff1a00 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c >>>> @@ -1027,13 +1027,15 @@ static int __verify_rsc_tbl_entry(struct rproc *rproc, >>>> return -EINVAL; >>>> } >>>> >>>> -static int rproc_update_resource_table_entry(struct rproc *rproc, >>>> +static int __update_rsc_tbl_entry(struct rproc *rproc, >>> >>> Unless the name is unruly, (which I don't think it is, you're still >>> having to line wrap at the call site), I tend to go for clarity over >>> brevity. >> It was only to have reasonable line length. I can keept original name and >> see impact on rest of the code. > > Reasonable line length is 80. This line was 65. This line yes. Name change proposal is to reduce line where this function is called (in rproc_apply_resource_overrides for exemple) But OK to keep standard rproc_xxx naming >
| |