[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aa96e076-f5a9-df65-bf7e-e4b02df0a210@ti.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2016 14:34:17 +0300
From: Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com>
To: Ivan Khoronzhuk <ivan.khoronzhuk@...aro.org>,
<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <mugunthanvnm@...com>
CC: <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<dlide@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 05/14] net: ethernet: ti: cpsw: don't check slave num
in runtime
On 08/06/2016 01:48 PM, Ivan Khoronzhuk wrote:
> No need to check const slave num in runtime for every packet,
> and ndev for slaves w/o ndev is anyway NULL. So remove redundant
> check.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ivan Khoronzhuk <ivan.khoronzhuk@...aro.org>
> ---
> drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c | 3 +--
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c
> index 70a9570..19aa4bb 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c
> @@ -498,8 +498,7 @@ static const struct cpsw_stats cpsw_gstrings_stats[] = {
> (func)(slave++, ##arg); \
> } while (0)
> #define cpsw_get_slave_ndev(priv, __slave_no__) \
> - ((__slave_no__ < priv->data.slaves) ? \
> - priv->slaves[__slave_no__].ndev : NULL)
> + priv->slaves[__slave_no__].ndev
So after this change it will be
#define cpsw_get_slave_ndev(priv, __slave_no__) priv->slaves[__slave_no__].ndev
Can we just drop cpsw_get_slave_ndev() macro?
> #define cpsw_get_slave_priv(priv, __slave_no__) \
> (((__slave_no__ < priv->data.slaves) && \
> (priv->slaves[__slave_no__].ndev)) ? \
>
--
regards,
-grygorii
Powered by blists - more mailing lists