[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <430d4342-a2fd-431f-b279-92ea90b83778@arm.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2023 17:58:51 +0100
From: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/6] thermal: trip: Simplify computing trip indices
On 10/6/23 18:40, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
>
> A trip index can be computed right away as a difference between the
> value of a trip pointer pointing to the given trip object and the
> start of the trips[] table in the thermal zone containing the trip, so
> change thermal_zone_trip_id() accordingly.
>
> No intentional functional impact (except for some speedup).
>
> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
> ---
> drivers/thermal/thermal_trip.c | 13 +++++--------
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> Index: linux-pm/drivers/thermal/thermal_trip.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/thermal/thermal_trip.c
> +++ linux-pm/drivers/thermal/thermal_trip.c
> @@ -175,14 +175,11 @@ int thermal_zone_set_trip(struct thermal
> int thermal_zone_trip_id(struct thermal_zone_device *tz,
> const struct thermal_trip *trip)
> {
> - int i;
> -
> lockdep_assert_held(&tz->lock);
>
> - for (i = 0; i < tz->num_trips; i++) {
> - if (&tz->trips[i] == trip)
> - return i;
> - }
> -
> - return -ENODATA;
> + /*
> + * Assume the trip to be located within the bounds of the thermal
> + * zone's trips[] table.
> + */
> + return trip - tz->trips;
> }
>
>
>
I agree wit hthe comment, we should be safe here, since we control that
array.
I could be a bit picky about this 'int' return in that function on
64bit kernels, were we have also ptrdiff_t set to long IIRC. But this
particular usage should be handled properly in all our cases, so:
Reviewed-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com>
Tested-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists