linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/4] dmaengine: rcar-dmac: Add for_each_rcar_dmac

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]

Message-ID: <20210112103831.GM2771@vkoul-mobl>
Date:   Tue, 12 Jan 2021 16:08:31 +0530
From:   Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>
To:     Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc:     Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Yoshihiro Shimoda <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@...esas.com>,
        Phong Hoang <phong.hoang.wz@...esas.com>,
        dmaengine <dmaengine@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" 
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] dmaengine: rcar-dmac: Add for_each_rcar_dmac_chan()
 helper

On 12-01-21, 11:26, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Vinod,
> 
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 11:19 AM Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org> wrote:
> > On 07-01-21, 19:15, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > Add and helper macro for iterating over all DMAC channels, taking into
> > > account the channel mask.  Use it where appropriate, to simplify code.
> > >
> > > Restore "reverse Christmas tree" order of local variables while adding a
> > > new variable.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>
> 
> > > --- a/drivers/dma/sh/rcar-dmac.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/dma/sh/rcar-dmac.c
> > > @@ -209,6 +209,11 @@ struct rcar_dmac {
> > >
> > >  #define to_rcar_dmac(d)              container_of(d, struct rcar_dmac, engine)
> > >
> > > +#define for_each_rcar_dmac_chan(i, chan, dmac)                                \
> > > +     for (i = 0, chan = &(dmac)->channels[0]; i < (dmac)->n_channels; \
> > > +          i++, chan++)                                                \
> >
> > single line to make it more readable? we have limit of 100 now :)
> 
> Do we have to push the limits?

In cases where it helps, I certainly recommend.. I feel in this case it
makes a better read to have it in a single line..

> BTW, the new punched cards are 96-column wide, not 100-column ;-)
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punched_card#IBM_96-column_format

Did we err in choosing 100 :D

-- 
~Vinod