[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAAdtpL7iWiumiOwMOH1xiBZvyOB0HB7W-9MMHoPPxkb3Srme=w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2021 10:58:36 +0100
From: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@...at.org>
To: Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@...il.com>
Cc: Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
"open list:BROADCOM NVRAM DRIVER" <linux-mips@...r.kernel.org>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Vivek Unune <npcomplete13@...il.com>,
bcm-kernel-feedback-list <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Rafał Miłecki <rafal@...ecki.pl>,
kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 mips/linux.git] firmware: bcm47xx_nvram: refactor
finding & reading NVRAM
Hi Rafał,
On Fri, Mar 5, 2021 at 6:55 AM Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@...il.com> wrote:
>
> From: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@...ecki.pl>
>
> 1. Use meaningful variable names (e.g. "flash_start", "res_size" instead
> of e.g. "iobase", "end")
> 2. Always operate on "offset" instead of mix of start, end, size, etc.
"instead of a mix"
> 3. Add helper checking for NVRAM to avoid duplicating code
> 4. Use "found" variable instead of goto
> 5. Use simpler checking of offsets and sizes (2 nested loops with
> trivial check instead of extra function)
This could be a series of trivial patches, why did you choose to make a mixed
bag harder to review?
>
> This change has been tested on BCM4706. Updated code checks the same
> offsets as before. Driver still finds & copies NVRAM content.
>
> Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@...ecki.pl>
> ---
> V2: Fix comment to match actual function name
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
> ---
> drivers/firmware/broadcom/bcm47xx_nvram.c | 111 ++++++++++++----------
> 1 file changed, 63 insertions(+), 48 deletions(-)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists