On 2/10/2024 2:39 AM, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> A situation like:
>
> if (!foo)
> goto bar;
>
> for (i = 0; i < foo; i++)
> ...1...
>
> bar:
> ...2...
>
> is totally identical to:
>
> for (i = 0; i < 0; i++) // === if (0)
> ...1...
>
> ...2...
>
> Get rid of such boilerplate.
>
> Signed-off-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/pm_helpers.c | 10 ----------
> 1 file changed, 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/pm_helpers.c b/drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/pm_helpers.c
> index 1ba65345a5e2..7193075e8c04 100644
> --- a/drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/pm_helpers.c
> +++ b/drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/pm_helpers.c
> @@ -878,14 +878,10 @@ static int vcodec_domains_get(struct venus_core *core)
> .pd_flags = PD_FLAG_NO_DEV_LINK,
> };
>
> - if (!res->vcodec_pmdomains_num)
> - goto skip_pmdomains;
> -
Removing the if check and relying only on for loop is good.
but I don't see the for loop here.
> ret = dev_pm_domain_attach_list(dev, &vcodec_data, &core->pmdomains);
> if (ret < 0)
> return ret;
>
Also, what's the base of this change? I don't see above API in the code
anywhere.
> -skip_pmdomains:
> if (!core->res->opp_pmdomain)
> return 0;
>
> @@ -928,9 +924,6 @@ static int core_resets_reset(struct venus_core *core)
> unsigned int i;
> int ret;
>
> - if (!res->resets_num)
> - return 0;
> -
> for (i = 0; i < res->resets_num; i++) {
> ret = reset_control_assert(core->resets[i]);
> if (ret)
> @@ -953,9 +946,6 @@ static int core_resets_get(struct venus_core *core)
> unsigned int i;
> int ret;
>
> - if (!res->resets_num)
> - return 0;
> -
> for (i = 0; i < res->resets_num; i++) {
> core->resets[i] =
> devm_reset_control_get_exclusive(dev, res->resets[i]);
>
