On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 02:14:04PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 12:03 PM Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 08:56:50PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
...
> > > + struct gpio_consumer_device *dev = lookup->parent;
> > > +
> > > + guard(mutex)(&dev->lock);
> > > +
> > > + return sprintf(page, "%s\n", lookup->key);
(1)
...
> > > +static ssize_t
> > > +gpio_consumer_lookup_config_offset_show(struct config_item *item, char *page)
> > > +{
> > > + struct gpio_consumer_lookup *lookup = to_gpio_consumer_lookup(item);
> > > + struct gpio_consumer_device *dev = lookup->parent;
> > > + unsigned int offset;
> > > +
> > > + scoped_guard(mutex, &dev->lock)
> > > + offset = lookup->offset;
> > > +
> > > + return sprintf(page, "%d\n", offset);
> >
> > Consistently it can be simplified same way
> >
> > guard(mutex)(&dev->lock);
> >
> > return sprintf(page, "%d\n", lookup->offset);
> >
> > BUT. Thinking about this more. With guard() we put sprintf() inside the lock,
> > which is suboptimal from runtime point of view. So, I think now that all these
> > should actually use scoped_guard() rather than guard().
> >
>
> Precisely why I used a scoped guard here. Same elsewhere.
So the 1) has to be amended then.
> > > +}
...
> > > + enum gpio_lookup_flags flags;
> > > +
> > > + flags = gpio_consumer_lookup_get_flags(item);
> >
> > This is perfectly one line < 80 characters.
>
> There's nothing wrong with setting the variable on another line though.
Why do we need 3 LoCs instead of a single one? Do you increase your line
statistics? :-) I really would like to know the rationale behind this.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
