[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1570025874.2472.14.camel@suse.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2019 16:17:54 +0200
From: Oliver Neukum <oneukum@...e.com>
To: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
linux-usb@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Anthony Wong <anthony.wong@...onical.com>,
Mario.Limonciello@...l.com,
Andreas Noever <andreas.noever@...il.com>,
Yehezkel Bernat <YehezkelShB@...il.com>,
Michael Jamet <michael.jamet@...el.com>,
Rajmohan Mani <rajmohan.mani@...el.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Nicholas Johnson <nicholas.johnson-opensource@...look.com.au>,
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 05/22] thunderbolt: Add helper macros to iterate
over switch ports
Am Dienstag, den 01.10.2019, 14:38 +0300 schrieb Mika Westerberg:
> @@ -1975,10 +1972,8 @@ void tb_switch_suspend(struct tb_switch *sw)
> if (err)
> return;
>
> - for (i = 1; i <= sw->config.max_port_number; i++) {
> - if (tb_port_has_remote(&sw->ports[i]))
> - tb_switch_suspend(sw->ports[i].remote->sw);
> - }
> + tb_switch_for_each_remote_port(sw, i)
> + tb_switch_suspend(sw->ports[i].remote->sw);
This macro looks a bit prone to misunderstanding.
I guess the function would be better if the test could be seen.
Regards
Oliver
Powered by blists - more mailing lists