On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 5:51 PM Philipp Stanner <pstanner@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, 2024-08-22 at 17:44 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 22, 2024 at 03:47:37PM +0200, Philipp Stanner wrote:
...
> > > - err = pcim_iomap_regions(pdev, 1 << PCI_PTP_BAR_NO,
> > > pci_name(pdev));
> > > - if (err)
> > > + clock->reg_base = pcim_iomap_region(pdev, PCI_PTP_BAR_NO,
> > > pci_name(pdev));
> > > + if (IS_ERR(clock->reg_base)) {
> > > + err = PTR_ERR(clock->reg_base);
> > > goto error_free;
> > > -
> > > - clock->reg_base = pcim_iomap_table(pdev)[PCI_PTP_BAR_NO];
> > > + }
> >
> > Perhaps
> >
> > clock->reg_base = pcim_iomap_region(pdev, PCI_PTP_BAR_NO,
> > pci_name(pdev));
> > err = PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO(clock->reg_base);
> > if (err)
> > goto error_free;
> >
> > This will make your patch smaller and neater.
> >
> > P.S. Do you use --histogram diff algo when preparing patches?
>
> So far not.
> Should one do that?
Id doesn't alter your code, it's in addition to what I suggested, but
as Linus shared that there is no reason to avoid using --histogram not
only in Linux kernel, but in general as it produces more
human-readable diff:s.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
