linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] coresight: etm4x: Two function calls less

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <CANLsYkxxe58r10aodp+Cdi8MBbidk_UDgFEbuO3WVZCu8k9uNQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 8 Jul 2019 10:16:30 -0600
From:   Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>
To:     Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
Cc:     linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        "Suzuki K. Poulose" <suzuki.poulose@....com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] coresight: etm4x: Two function calls less

On Fri, 5 Jul 2019 at 11:40, Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de> wrote:
>
> From: Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
> Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2019 19:33:26 +0200
>
> Avoid an extra function call in two function implementations
> by using a ternary operator instead of a conditional statement.
>
> This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software.
>
> Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
> ---
>  drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-etm4x-sysfs.c | 13 ++++---------
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-etm4x-sysfs.c b/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-etm4x-sysfs.c
> index a0365e23678e..219c10eb752c 100644
> --- a/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-etm4x-sysfs.c
> +++ b/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-etm4x-sysfs.c
> @@ -296,11 +296,8 @@ static ssize_t mode_store(struct device *dev,
>
>         spin_lock(&drvdata->spinlock);
>         config->mode = val & ETMv4_MODE_ALL;
> -
> -       if (config->mode & ETM_MODE_EXCLUDE)
> -               etm4_set_mode_exclude(drvdata, true);
> -       else
> -               etm4_set_mode_exclude(drvdata, false);
> +       etm4_set_mode_exclude(drvdata,
> +                             config->mode & ETM_MODE_EXCLUDE ? true : false);
>
>         if (drvdata->instrp0 == true) {
>                 /* start by clearing instruction P0 field */
> @@ -999,10 +996,8 @@ static ssize_t addr_range_store(struct device *dev,
>          * Program include or exclude control bits for vinst or vdata
>          * whenever we change addr comparators to ETM_ADDR_TYPE_RANGE
>          */
> -       if (config->mode & ETM_MODE_EXCLUDE)
> -               etm4_set_mode_exclude(drvdata, true);
> -       else
> -               etm4_set_mode_exclude(drvdata, false);
> +       etm4_set_mode_exclude(drvdata,
> +                             config->mode & ETM_MODE_EXCLUDE ? true : false);

Looks good to me - I will add this to my next branch when we have a new 5.3-rc1.

Thanks,
Mathieu

>
>         spin_unlock(&drvdata->spinlock);
>         return size;
> --
> 2.22.0
>