Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 24 Feb 2020 15:23:43 -0800 | From | "Christopher S. Hall" <> | Subject | Re: [Intel PMC TGPIO Driver 1/5] drivers/ptp: Add Enhanced handling of reserve fields |
| |
Hi Richard,
Thanks for the detailed review.
On Sun, Feb 02, 2020 at 05:27:00PM -0800, Richard Cochran wrote: > On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 01:48:48PM -0800, christopher.s.hall@intel.com wrote: > > diff --git a/drivers/ptp/ptp_chardev.c b/drivers/ptp/ptp_chardev.c > > index 9d72ab593f13..f9ad6df57fa5 100644 > > --- a/drivers/ptp/ptp_chardev.c > > +++ b/drivers/ptp/ptp_chardev.c > > @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ > > #include <linux/timekeeping.h> > > > > #include <linux/nospec.h> > > +#include <linux/string.h> > > Please group these two includes with the others, above, in > alphabetical order.
OK. Done.
> > #include "ptp_private.h" > > > > @@ -106,6 +107,28 @@ int ptp_open(struct posix_clock *pc, fmode_t fmode) > > return 0; > > } > > > > +/* Returns -1 if any reserved fields are non-zero */ > > +static inline int _check_rsv_field(unsigned int *field, size_t size) > > How about _check_reserved_field() instead?
No problem. Sounds good.
> > +{ > > + unsigned int *iter; > > Ugh, 'ptr' please. > > > + int ret = 0; > > + > > + for (iter = field; iter < field+size && ret == 0; ++iter) > > + ret = *iter == 0 ? 0 : -1; > > Please use the "early out" pattern: > > for (ptr = field; ptr < field + size; ptr++) { > if (*ptr) { > return -1; > } > } > return 0; > > Note: field + size > Note: ptr++
OK for both of these.
> > + > > + return ret; > > +} > > +#define check_rsv_field(field) _check_rsv_field(field, ARRAY_SIZE(field)) > > And check_reserved_field() here. No need to abbreviate.
OK. Done.
> Thanks, > Richard
Thanks, Chris
| |