The elegant code in at24_read() has the drawback that we now need
to make a copy of all parameters to pass them to the post-processing
callback function if there is one. Rewrite the loop in such a way that
the parameters are not modified, so saving them is no longer needed.
Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare <jdelvare@xxxxxxx>
Cc: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
This has the drawback of creating an asymetry with at24_write(), so
I'm not 100% if we want to apply this. If anyone has a better idea,
please let me know.
drivers/misc/eeprom/at24.c | 13 +++++--------
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
--- linux-5.7.orig/drivers/misc/eeprom/at24.c 2020-08-07 14:23:39.882191500 +0200
+++ linux-5.7/drivers/misc/eeprom/at24.c 2020-08-07 14:28:39.039360687 +0200
@@ -423,10 +423,7 @@ static int at24_read(void *priv, unsigne
struct at24_data *at24;
struct device *dev;
char *buf = val;
- int ret;
- unsigned int orig_off = off;
- char *orig_buf = buf;
- size_t orig_count = count;
+ int i, ret;
at24 = priv;
dev = at24_base_client_dev(at24);
@@ -449,15 +446,15 @@ static int at24_read(void *priv, unsigne
*/
mutex_lock(&at24->lock);
+ i = 0;
while (count) {
- ret = at24_regmap_read(at24, buf, off, count);
+ ret = at24_regmap_read(at24, buf + i, off + i, count);
if (ret < 0) {
mutex_unlock(&at24->lock);
pm_runtime_put(dev);
return ret;
}
- buf += ret;
- off += ret;
+ i += ret;
count -= ret;
}
@@ -466,7 +463,7 @@ static int at24_read(void *priv, unsigne
pm_runtime_put(dev);
if (unlikely(at24->read_post))
- at24->read_post(orig_off, orig_buf, orig_count);
+ at24->read_post(off, buf, i);
return 0;
}
--
Jean Delvare
SUSE L3 Support
