linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Staging: comedi: move trailing statement to next line in ni_mio

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 14 Jan 2014 11:45:38 +0000
From:	Ian Abbott <abbotti@....co.uk>
To:	Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
CC:	Chase Southwood <chase.southwood@...oo.com>,
	"devel@...verdev.osuosl.org" <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
	"gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Ian Abbott <ian.abbott@....co.uk>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Staging: comedi: move trailing statement to next line
 in ni_mio_common.c

On 2014-01-14 07:23, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 07:16:14PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
>> On Mon, 2014-01-13 at 21:13 -0600, Chase Southwood wrote:
>>> This patch for ni_mio_common.c silences a checkpatch error due to a
>>> trailing statement.
>> []
>>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/comedi/drivers/ni_mio_common.c b/drivers/staging/comedi/drivers/ni_mio_common.c
>> []
>>> @@ -692,7 +692,8 @@ static void ni_clear_ai_fifo(struct comedi_device *dev)
>>>   		/*  Flush the 6143 data FIFO */
>>>   		ni_writel(0x10, AIFIFO_Control_6143);	/*  Flush fifo */
>>>   		ni_writel(0x00, AIFIFO_Control_6143);	/*  Flush fifo */
>>> -		while (ni_readl(AIFIFO_Status_6143) & 0x10) ;	/*  Wait for complete */
>>> +		while (ni_readl(AIFIFO_Status_6143) & 0x10)
>>> +			;	/*  Wait for complete */
>>
>> It's generally better to use timeouts too.
>
> Just to clarify what Joe is saying do:
>
> 		/*  Wait for complete */
> 		while (timemout < TIMEOUT) {
> 			if (ni_readl(AIFIFO_Status_6143) & 0x10)
> 				break;
> 			udelay(1);
> 		}
>
> I added in a delay...  The problem is that you'd probably have to look
> at the hardware spec to know what timeout to use or if the delay is
> needed.

Some longish timeout of, say, 10000 iterations (~ 0.01 seconds) would 
probably do as it's not that time critical.

We wouldn't expect code clean-up patches to have to deal with that sort 
of thing though.

-- 
-=( Ian Abbott @ MEV Ltd.    E-mail: <abbotti@....co.uk>        )=-
-=( Tel: +44 (0)161 477 1898   FAX: +44 (0)161 718 3587         )=-
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/