On 09/10/2022 08:38, Dafna Hirschfeld wrote:
On 03.10.2022 15:18, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
From: Jacopo Mondi <jacopo+renesas@xxxxxxxxxx>
Add a for_each_active_route() macro to replace the repeated pattern
of iterating on the active routes of a routing table.
Signed-off-by: Jacopo Mondi <jacopo+renesas@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
.clang-format | 1 +
drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-subdev.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
include/media/v4l2-subdev.h | 13 +++++++++++++
3 files changed, 34 insertions(+)
diff --git a/.clang-format b/.clang-format
index 1247d54f9e49..31f39ae78f7b 100644
--- a/.clang-format
+++ b/.clang-format
@@ -190,6 +190,7 @@ ForEachMacros:
- 'for_each_active_dev_scope'
- 'for_each_active_drhd_unit'
- 'for_each_active_iommu'
+ - 'for_each_active_route'
- 'for_each_aggr_pgid'
- 'for_each_available_child_of_node'
- 'for_each_bench'
diff --git a/drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-subdev.c
b/drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-subdev.c
index 3ae4f39a50e4..1049c07d2e49 100644
--- a/drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-subdev.c
+++ b/drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-subdev.c
@@ -1212,6 +1212,26 @@ int v4l2_subdev_set_routing(struct v4l2_subdev
*sd,
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(v4l2_subdev_set_routing);
+struct v4l2_subdev_route *
+__v4l2_subdev_next_active_route(const struct v4l2_subdev_krouting
*routing,
+ struct v4l2_subdev_route *route)
+{
+ if (route)
+ ++route;
+ else
+ route = &routing->routes[0];
+
+ for (; route < routing->routes + routing->num_routes; ++route) {
+ if (!(route->flags & V4L2_SUBDEV_ROUTE_FL_ACTIVE))
+ continue;
+
+ return route;
+ }
+
+ return NULL;
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__v4l2_subdev_next_active_route);
+
#endif /* CONFIG_VIDEO_V4L2_SUBDEV_API */
#endif /* CONFIG_MEDIA_CONTROLLER */
diff --git a/include/media/v4l2-subdev.h b/include/media/v4l2-subdev.h
index 7962e6572bda..89e58208e330 100644
--- a/include/media/v4l2-subdev.h
+++ b/include/media/v4l2-subdev.h
@@ -1435,6 +1435,19 @@ int v4l2_subdev_set_routing(struct v4l2_subdev
*sd,
struct v4l2_subdev_state *state,
const struct v4l2_subdev_krouting *routing);
+struct v4l2_subdev_route *
+__v4l2_subdev_next_active_route(const struct v4l2_subdev_krouting
*routing,
+ struct v4l2_subdev_route *route);
+
+/**
+ * for_each_active_route - iterate on all active routes of a routing
table
+ * @routing: The routing table
+ * @route: The route iterator
+ */
+#define for_each_active_route(routing, route) \
+ for ((route) = NULL; \
+ ((route) = __v4l2_subdev_next_active_route((routing),
(route)));)
Hi, shouldn't it be something like:
for ((route) = NULL; (route) ; (route) =
__v4l2_subdev_next_active_route((routing), (route)))
What you suggest would never do anything: you initialize route to NULL,
and then check if the route is !NULL.
I also find the current version a bit "interesting", but afaics, it
works correctly.
Tomi
