Re: [PATCH 2/6] soc: qcom: llcc: Refactor llcc driver to support multiple configuration

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





On 8/10/2023 5:52 PM, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
On 10/08/2023 07:11, Komal Bajaj wrote:
+    if (!cfgs || cfgs->num_config != DEF_NUM_CFG) {
+        ret = -EINVAL;
+        goto err;
+    }
+    cfg = &cfgs->llcc_config[DEF_NUM_CFG - 1];

This is a bit of a redundant check.

You add in the check for num_config != 1, then deref llc_config[0] but in patch #4 you get an index and check that index against num_config

I would take this blame on me to suggest this..,but i was trying to
avoid the hard-coding initially done for [1], now, num_config[2]
converted to ARRAY_SIZE(), i find no harm in checking
cfgs->num_config >  DEF_NUM_CFG
since, anyways it will move to different function in #4.

[1]
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/39b4bafd-410f-cae8-13ae-e18d751b51a2@xxxxxxxxxxx/

[2]
.num_cfgs	= 1,

-Mukesh

I'm not seeing how at this point in your series, how num_config could be anything other than 1.

I'd do away with the DEF_NUM_CFG define in this code/series completely.

num_config should encode all the necessary detail we need, DEF_NUM_CFG just adds noise.

---
bod



[Index of Archives]     [Device Tree Compilter]     [Device Tree Spec]     [Linux Driver Backports]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux PCI Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]     [Yosemite Backpacking]


  Powered by Linux