[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <eb4713e3-ccc5-4848-800e-dbf30158b8af@gmx.net>
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2024 12:54:35 +0200
From: Stefan Wahren <wahrenst@....net>
To: Umang Jain <umang.jain@...asonboard.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Broadcom internal kernel review list <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>
Cc: linux-rpi-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham@...asonboard.com>,
Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>,
Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/8] staging: vchiq_core: Lower indentation of a
conditional block
Hi Umang,
Am 11.10.24 um 09:22 schrieb Umang Jain:
> Lower indentation of 'if (bulk->data && service->instance)'
> conditional block. This is achieved introducing a early check for
> (!bulk->data || !service->instance) and using a goto label 'complete'
> if it evaluates to true.
>
> No functional changes intended in this patch.
>
> Signed-off-by: Umang Jain <umang.jain@...asonboard.com>
> ---
> .../interface/vchiq_arm/vchiq_core.c | 61 ++++++++++---------
> 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/vc04_services/interface/vchiq_arm/vchiq_core.c b/drivers/staging/vc04_services/interface/vchiq_arm/vchiq_core.c
> index 15257cf66fa4..b95443043c27 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/vc04_services/interface/vchiq_arm/vchiq_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/vc04_services/interface/vchiq_arm/vchiq_core.c
> @@ -1326,44 +1326,45 @@ notify_bulks(struct vchiq_service *service, struct vchiq_bulk_queue *queue,
> struct vchiq_bulk *bulk =
> &queue->bulks[BULK_INDEX(queue->remove)];
>
> + if (!bulk->data || !service->instance)
> + goto complete;
> +
> /*
> * Only generate callbacks for non-dummy bulk
> * requests, and non-terminated services
> */
> - if (bulk->data && service->instance) {
> - if (bulk->actual != VCHIQ_BULK_ACTUAL_ABORTED) {
> - if (bulk->dir == VCHIQ_BULK_TRANSMIT) {
> - VCHIQ_SERVICE_STATS_INC(service, bulk_tx_count);
> - VCHIQ_SERVICE_STATS_ADD(service, bulk_tx_bytes,
> - bulk->actual);
> - } else {
> - VCHIQ_SERVICE_STATS_INC(service, bulk_rx_count);
> - VCHIQ_SERVICE_STATS_ADD(service, bulk_rx_bytes,
> - bulk->actual);
> - }
> + if (bulk->actual != VCHIQ_BULK_ACTUAL_ABORTED) {
> + if (bulk->dir == VCHIQ_BULK_TRANSMIT) {
> + VCHIQ_SERVICE_STATS_INC(service, bulk_tx_count);
> + VCHIQ_SERVICE_STATS_ADD(service, bulk_tx_bytes,
> + bulk->actual);
> } else {
> - VCHIQ_SERVICE_STATS_INC(service, bulk_aborted_count);
> - }
> - if (bulk->mode == VCHIQ_BULK_MODE_BLOCKING) {
> - struct bulk_waiter *waiter;
> -
> - spin_lock(&service->state->bulk_waiter_spinlock);
> - waiter = bulk->userdata;
> - if (waiter) {
> - waiter->actual = bulk->actual;
> - complete(&waiter->event);
> - }
> - spin_unlock(&service->state->bulk_waiter_spinlock);
> - } else if (bulk->mode == VCHIQ_BULK_MODE_CALLBACK) {
> - enum vchiq_reason reason =
> - get_bulk_reason(bulk);
> - status = make_service_callback(service, reason, NULL,
> - bulk->userdata);
> - if (status == -EAGAIN)
> - break;
> + VCHIQ_SERVICE_STATS_INC(service, bulk_rx_count);
> + VCHIQ_SERVICE_STATS_ADD(service, bulk_rx_bytes,
> + bulk->actual);
> }
> + } else {
> + VCHIQ_SERVICE_STATS_INC(service, bulk_aborted_count);
> }
> + if (bulk->mode == VCHIQ_BULK_MODE_BLOCKING) {
> + struct bulk_waiter *waiter;
>
> + spin_lock(&service->state->bulk_waiter_spinlock);
> + waiter = bulk->userdata;
> + if (waiter) {
> + waiter->actual = bulk->actual;
> + complete(&waiter->event);
> + }
> + spin_unlock(&service->state->bulk_waiter_spinlock);
> + } else if (bulk->mode == VCHIQ_BULK_MODE_CALLBACK) {
> + enum vchiq_reason reason =
> + get_bulk_reason(bulk);
> + status = make_service_callback(service, reason, NULL,
> + bulk->userdata);
> + if (status == -EAGAIN)
> + break;
> + }
> +complete:
I would consider goto labels within a while loop as error prone and
ugly. Maybe moving the enclosing code into a separate function would be
a nicer approach?
Regards
> queue->remove++;
> complete(&service->bulk_remove_event);
> }
Powered by blists - more mailing lists