[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7068152e-5e1b-94b2-bcb2-c66e622bd127@linaro.org>
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2021 16:18:32 -0500
From: Alex Elder <elder@...aro.org>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, bjorn.andersson@...aro.org,
evgreen@...omium.org, cpratapa@...eaurora.org, elder@...nel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 4/4] net: ipa: activate some commented assertions
On 3/19/21 1:32 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>> @@ -212,7 +213,7 @@ static inline u32 ipa_reg_bcr_val(enum ipa_version version)
>> BCR_HOLB_DROP_L2_IRQ_FMASK |
>> BCR_DUAL_TX_FMASK;
>>
>> - /* assert(version != IPA_VERSION_4_5); */
>> + ipa_assert(NULL, version != IPA_VERSION_4_5);
>
> Hi Alex
>
> It is impossible to see just looking what the NULL means. And given
> its the first parameter, it should be quite important. I find this API
> pretty bad.
I actually don't like the first argument. I would have
supplied the main IPA pointer, but that isn't always
visible or available (the GSI code doesn't have the
IPA pointer definition). So I thought instead I could
at least supply the underlying device if available,
and use dev_err().
But I wouldn't mind just getting rid of the first
argument and having a failed assertion always call
pr_err() and not dev_err().
The thing of most value to me the asserted condition.
Thoughts?
-Alex
Powered by blists - more mailing lists