On Mon 2019-05-20 09:03:50, Ran Wang wrote:
> Hi Pavel,
>
> On Monday, May 20, 2019 16:57, Pavel Machek wrote:
> >
> > Hi!
> >
> > > > > +static int rcpm_pm_prepare(struct device *dev) {
> > > > > + struct device_node *np = dev->of_node;
> > > > > + struct wakeup_source *ws;
> > > > > + struct rcpm *rcpm;
> > > > > + u32 value[RCPM_WAKEUP_CELL_MAX_SIZE + 1], tmp;
> > > > > + int i, ret;
> > > > > +
> > > > > + rcpm = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
> > > > > + if (!rcpm)
> > > > > + return -EINVAL;
> > > > > +
> > > > > + /* Begin with first registered wakeup source */
> > > > > + ws = wakeup_source_get_next(NULL);
> > > > > + while (ws) {
> > > >
> > > > while (ws = wakeup_source_get_next(NULL)) ?
> > >
> > > Actually, we only pass NULL to wakeup_source_get_next() at very first
> > > call to get 1st wakeup source. Then in the while loop, we will fetch
> > > next source but not 1st, that's different. I am afraid your suggestion
> > > is not quite correct.
> >
> > Sorry, I seen your next version before seeing this explanation.
> >
> > You are right, but the current code is "interesting". What about
> >
> > ws = NULL;
> > while (ws = wakeup_source_get_next(NULL)) ...
> >
> > then?
>
> Did you mean:
> ws = NULL;
> while (ws = wakeup_source_get_next(ws)) ...
>
> Yes, that will be the same to my original logic, do you recommend to change
> to this? :)
Yes please. It will be less confusing to the reader.
Thanks (and sorry for cross-talk),
Pavel
--
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, Managing Director: Wolfgang Denk
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
