On 5/4/2020 9:37 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Mon, May 04, 2020 at 01:16:10PM +0300, Shenhar, Talel wrote:
+ mci = edac_mc_alloc(0, ARRAY_SIZE(layers), layers,
+ sizeof(struct al_mc_edac));
You can let that line stick out.
I rather avoid having this as a checkpatch warnning... (automation and
stuff...)
checkpatch.pl - while useful - should not be taken to the letter and
human brain should be applied to sanity check it what it warns about.
This line break does seems to my eye as too hard to read.
Let me know if you feel strongly about it.
I'm just sayin' - in the end of the day you'll be staring at that code -
not me - so whatever *you* prefer. :-)
Just don't follow tools blindly.
Thanks, I will leave it that way as it will make my life easier (with
automatic vim tools and automation) and doesn't really break code
understanding.
+ if (al_mc->irq_ue <= 0 || al_mc->irq_ce <= 0)
Shouldn't this be && here?
I mean, you want to poll when neither of the IRQs can be found. But then
if you find one of them and not the other, what do you do? Poll and
interrupt? Is that case even possible?
Correct.
In case dt defined interrupt line only for one type and not for the other,
than the interrupt mode shall be used for one of them while polling mode for
the other.
That warrants a comment above it.
Shall be part of v7.
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
