[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160313155933.GD13211@localhost>
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2016 21:29:33 +0530
From: Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>
To: Sinan Kaya <okaya@...eaurora.org>
Cc: dmaengine@...r.kernel.org, marc.zyngier@....com,
mark.rutland@....com, timur@...eaurora.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, cov@...eaurora.org, jcm@...hat.com,
shankerd@...eaurora.org, vikrams@...eaurora.org,
eric.auger@...aro.org, agross@...eaurora.org, arnd@...db.de,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V14 5/9] dma: qcom_hidma: implement lower level hardware
interface
On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 02:29:41PM -0500, Sinan Kaya wrote:
> On 3/11/2016 11:44 AM, Sinan Kaya wrote:
> > On 3/11/2016 11:32 AM, Vinod Koul wrote:
> >>>>> memcpy(lldev->tre_ring + lldev->tre_write_offset, &tre->tre_local[0],
> >>>>>>>> + TRE_SIZE);
> >> This one
I would write this as:
memcpy(lldev->tre_ring + lldev->tre_write_offset,
&tre->tre_local[0], TRE_SIZE);
To make it look more readable
> >>
> >>>>>>>> + lldev->tx_status_list[tre->idx].err_code = 0;
> >>>>>>>> + lldev->tx_status_list[tre->idx].err_info = 0;
> >>>>>>>> + tre->queued = 1;
> >>>>>>>> + lldev->pending_tre_count++;
> >>>>
> >>>> Is this the only one without alignment? I couldn't understand what you mean by
> >>>> above one?
> >> quoting Coding Style:
> >>
> >> Statements longer than 80 columns will be broken into sensible chunks, unless
> >> exceeding 80 columns significantly increases readability and does not hide
> >> information.
> >
> >> "Descendants are always substantially shorter than the parent and
> >> are placed substantially to the right."
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Sorry for my poor English. I never got this rule.
> >
> > Which one is a "substantially" right? Can you give me an example?
> >
> > I need to understand how you'd write this to satisfy the above rule.
> >
> > like this:
> >
> > memcpy(lldev->tre_ring + lldev->tre_write_offset, &tre->tre_local[0],
> > TRE_SIZE);
No
> >
> > or
> >
> > memcpy(lldev->tre_ring + lldev->tre_write_offset,
> > &tre->tre_local[0], TRE_SIZE);
Better or above
> >
> > or
> >
> > memcpy(lldev->tre_ring + lldev->tre_write_offset, &tre->tre_local[0],
> > TRE_SIZE);
This doesnt look very readable IMHO, mostly try to use common sense and if
it looks good and easy to read then you might have nailed it :)
> >
> > or
> >
> > memcpy(lldev->tre_ring + lldev->tre_write_offset,
> > &tre->tre_local[0],
> > TRE_SIZE);
> >
> so, I looked at other examples in drivers/dma/dw/core.c file...
>
> I'm seeing two different patterns in the code. One pattern is to align
> the next line to the first character of the first line like I did based
> on the previous review comments.
>
> mem_width = min_t(unsigned int,
> data_width, dwc_fast_ffs(mem | len));
>
> The second example places an extra tab like this.
>
> list_add_tail(&desc->desc_node,
> &first->tx_list);
>
>
> Based on this example: this is how I'm changing the second one
>
> + lldev->tre_write_offset = (lldev->tre_write_offset + HIDMA_TRE_SIZE)
> + % lldev->tre_ring_size;
> +
>
> I'm still not sure what you want to do with this:
>
> Is this what you want to do ?
> memcpy(lldev->tre_ring + lldev->tre_write_offset, &tre->tre_local[0],
> - HIDMA_TRE_SIZE);
> + HIDMA_TRE_SIZE);
>
> I also got flagged before that HIDMA_TRE_SIZE does not start from the first
> character.
>
> I have done the renaming. This is all left for me to post a follow up.
OK
--
~Vinod
Powered by blists - more mailing lists