[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YDBhsntkwy249RYn@Konrads-MacBook-Pro.local>
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2021 20:11:14 -0500
From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
To: Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@...el.com>
Cc: linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>,
Chris Browy <cbrowy@...ry-design.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
Jon Masters <jcm@...masters.org>,
Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>,
Rafael Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>,
"John Groves (jgroves)" <jgroves@...ron.com>,
"Kelley, Sean V" <sean.v.kelley@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 6/9] cxl/mem: Enable commands via CEL
> +static inline struct cxl_mem_command *cxl_mem_find_command(u16 opcode)
> +{
> + struct cxl_mem_command *c;
> +
> + cxl_for_each_cmd(c)
Would you be amenable to adding {
> + if (c->opcode == opcode)
> + return c;
> +
and } here
(and in the code below as well where cxl_for_each_cmd is used?)
Regardless of that:
Reviewed-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists