On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:23 PM, Christian König <deathsimple@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Am 26.04.2017 um 19:00 schrieb Andy Shevchenko: >>> + while (1) { >> >> This raises red flag. Care to refactor? >> Also do {} while () syntax allows faster to get that the loop body >> goes at least once. > > > I've tried to refactor this, but couldn't come up with something which works > and is readable at the same time. > > Any suggestion how this should look like? This is original code. --- 8< --- 8< --- while (1) { for (i = PCI_BRIDGE_RESOURCES; i < PCI_BRIDGE_RESOURCE_END; i++) { struct resource *res = &bridge->resource[i]; if ((res->flags & type_mask) != (type & type_mask)) continue; /* Ignore BARs which are still in use */ if (res->child) continue; ret = add_to_list(&saved, bridge, res, 0, 0); if (ret) goto cleanup; if (res->parent) release_resource(res); res->start = 0; res->end = 0; dev_info(&bridge->dev, "BAR %d: released %pR\n", i, res); break; } if (i == PCI_BRIDGE_RESOURCE_END) break; if (!bridge->bus || !bridge->bus->self) break; bridge = bridge->bus->self; } --- 8< --- 8< --- I would think about something like below static int ...xxx...(...) { unsigned int i; int ret; for (i = PCI_BRIDGE_RESOURCES; i < PCI_BRIDGE_RESOURCE_END; i++) { struct resource *res = &bridge->resource[i]; /* Ignore BARs which are still in use */ if (((res->flags ^ type) & type_mask) == 0 && !res->child) break; } if (i == PCI_BRIDGE_RESOURCE_END) return -EBUSY; ret = add_to_list(&saved, bridge, res, 0, 0); if (ret) return ret; if (res->parent) release_resource(res); res->start = 0; res->end = 0; dev_info(&bridge->dev, "BAR %d: released %pR\n", i, res); return i; } struct pci_dev *next = bridge; ... do { bridge = next; ret = ...xxx...(...); if (ret) goto cleanup; next = bridge->bus ? bridge->bus->self : NULL; } while (next); ... -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel