Hi Jonathan, Chenyuan, to 11. huhtik. 2024 klo 15.20 Matti Vaittinen (mazziesaccount@xxxxxxxxx) kirjoitti: > > On 3/23/24 20:13, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > > On Wed, 20 Mar 2024 09:02:46 +0200 > > Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >> Hi Jonathan, all. > >> > >> I am resending this as I don't think I found the mail from lore. I wrote > >> this using my phone so maybe it was sent as HTML and stuck to some > >> filters. If you receive this twice - I am sorry... > >> > >> la 16. maalisk. 2024 klo 15.40 Jonathan Cameron <jic23@xxxxxxxxxx > >> <mailto:jic23@xxxxxxxxxx>> kirjoitti: > >> > >> > On Fri, 15 Mar 2024 15:49:10 -0500 > >> > Chenyuan Yang <chenyuan0y@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:chenyuan0y@xxxxxxxxx>> > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> > > Hi Matti, > >> > > > >> > > Thanks for your reply! > >> > > > >> > > > I think the suggested-by tag is a bit of an overkill :) I don't feel > >> > > > like taking the credit - you spotted the problem and fixed it! > >> > > > >> > > You did help me figure out the real issue here and how to fix it :) > >> > > > >> > > > Do you think you could fix the removal of the duplicates too? > >> > > > >> > > Sure, I can help to implement the deduplication logic. > >> > > Here is a potential patch for it based on your help. > >> > > Besides, I changed the stop condition in the inner loop to `j < idx` > >> > > since the current last index should be `idx - 1`. > >> > > >> > Matti, I didn't follow why duplicates are a problem? > >> > >> The function here builds the tables for available integration times. > >> These are shown to users via sysfs (if I'm not mistaken) - and while the > >> user-space algorithms may tolerate dublicates, they are ugly (in my > >> opinon) when available times are manually listed. > >> > >> > >> > Sure the code is less efficient, but do we end up with a wrong > >> > answer as a result (I've not checked logic, but I'd expect either > >> > first or last of repeating values to be used depending on the alg). > >> > >> If we discuss completely omitting duplicated times from the driver > >> (which was one thing I referred in my previous mail) - then we are > >> likely to face problems as there can be register values, which then > >> can't be translated to times, read from a HW. > >> > >> Eg, we need to have everything described in driver tables used for > >> driver's computations - but (in my opinion) we should drop duplicates > >> from these tables which we hand over via sysfs. > >> > > All makes sense. Thanks for the explanation. > > Hi Chenyuan > > I don't think I have seen a patch fixing this merged? Do you know if I > have just missed it? If not, do you still plan to send a fix to this or > should I do it? Jonathan, seems like Chenyuan has gone offline. I'd like to get this fixed as it'll bite us sooner or later if left like this. What's the right way to proceed? Should I craft a patch and add signed-off or suggested-by from Chenyuan as he has done most of this already? Yours, -- Matti > -- > Matti Vaittinen > Linux kernel developer at ROHM Semiconductors > Oulu Finland > > ~~ When things go utterly wrong vim users can always type :help! ~~ > -- Matti Vaittinen Linux kernel developer at ROHM Semiconductors Oulu Finland ~~ When things go utterly wrong vim users can always type :help! ~~ Discuss - Estimate - Plan - Report and finally accomplish this: void do_work(int time) __attribute__ ((const));
