lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Aug]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v1 2/2] irqchip/tegra: Clean up coding style
From
Date
13.08.2019 17:50, Marc Zyngier пишет:
> On Sun, 11 Aug 2019 19:30:44 +0100,
> Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Make coding style to conform to the kernel's standard by fixing checkpatch
>> warnings about "line over 80 characters".
>
> The last time I used a VT100 was about 30 years ago. I still think
> this was one of the most brilliant piece of equipment DEC ever
> produced, but I replaced it at the time with a Wyse 50 that had a 132
> column mode. But even then, I could make my XTerm as wide as I wanted,
> and things haven't regressed much since.
>
> More seriously, I don't consider the 80 column limit a hard one, and
> I'm pretty happy with code that spans more that 80 columns if that
> allows to read an expression without messing with the flow.

Usually I have multiple source files opened side-by-side and the view sizes are tuned for 80
chars, it messes at least my flow when something goes over 80 chars.

>>
>> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/irqchip/irq-tegra.c | 15 +++++----------
>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-tegra.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-tegra.c
>> index 14dcacc2ad38..f829a5990dae 100644
>> --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-tegra.c
>> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-tegra.c
>> @@ -74,7 +74,7 @@ static struct tegra_ictlr_info *lic;
>>
>> static inline void tegra_ictlr_write_mask(struct irq_data *d, unsigned long reg)
>> {
>> - void __iomem *base = (void __iomem __force *)d->chip_data;
>> + void __iomem *base = lic->base[d->hwirq / 32];
>
> (1) This is an undocumented change

In my opinion this is a very trivial change and then the end result is absolutely the same,
hence nothing to document here. Just read the code, I'd say.

> (2) Why do you think that moving from a per-interrupt base that is
> known at setup time to something that has to be recomputed on each
> and every access is a good thing?

I think that there is no practical difference and the new variant is a bit more obvious and
readable.

>
>> u32 mask;
>>
>> mask = BIT(d->hwirq % 32);
>> @@ -142,7 +142,8 @@ static int tegra_ictlr_suspend(void)
>> writel_relaxed(~0ul, ictlr + ICTLR_CPU_IER_CLR);
>>
>> /* Enable the wakeup sources of ictlr */
>> - writel_relaxed(lic->ictlr_wake_mask[i], ictlr + ICTLR_CPU_IER_SET);
>> + writel_relaxed(lic->ictlr_wake_mask[i],
>> + ictlr + ICTLR_CPU_IER_SET);
>> }
>> local_irq_restore(flags);
>>
>> @@ -222,7 +223,6 @@ static int tegra_ictlr_domain_alloc(struct irq_domain *domain,
>> {
>> struct irq_fwspec *fwspec = data;
>> struct irq_fwspec parent_fwspec;
>> - struct tegra_ictlr_info *info = domain->host_data;
>> irq_hw_number_t hwirq;
>> unsigned int i;
>>
>> @@ -235,13 +235,9 @@ static int tegra_ictlr_domain_alloc(struct irq_domain *domain,
>> if (hwirq >= (num_ictlrs * 32))
>> return -EINVAL;
>>
>> - for (i = 0; i < nr_irqs; i++) {
>> - int ictlr = (hwirq + i) / 32;
>> -
>> + for (i = 0; i < nr_irqs; i++)
>> irq_domain_set_hwirq_and_chip(domain, virq + i, hwirq + i,
>> - &tegra_ictlr_chip,
>> - (void __force *)info->base[ictlr]);
>> - }
>> + &tegra_ictlr_chip, NULL);
>>
>> parent_fwspec = *fwspec;
>> parent_fwspec.fwnode = domain->parent->fwnode;
>> @@ -312,7 +308,6 @@ static int __init tegra_ictlr_init(struct device_node *node,
>> "%pOF: Found %u interrupt controllers in DT; expected %u.\n",
>> node, num_ictlrs, soc->num_ictlrs);
>>
>> -
>> domain = irq_domain_add_hierarchy(parent_domain, 0, num_ictlrs * 32,
>> node, &tegra_ictlr_domain_ops,
>> lic);
>> --
>> 2.22.0
>>
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-08-13 17:41    [W:0.037 / U:2.828 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site