On giovedì 16 marzo 2023 17:17:47 CET Fabio M. De Francesco wrote: > On giovedì 16 marzo 2023 16:09:08 CET Khadija Kamran wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 03:38:03PM +0100, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote: > > > Khadija, > > > > > > Just saw your v5 patch and Greg's two replies. > > > > > > For v6 you will need to change the subject to "[PATCH v6] staging: > > > axis-fifo: > > > initialize timeouts in init only" to indicate that you are doing > > assignments > > > > in axis_fifo_init(). > > > > > > Don't forget to extend the version log with "Changes in v6:" and clarify > > > that > > > v5 had a different "Object" (you should probably also add a link to the v5 > > > patch in lore: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml > > > /ZBMR4s8xyHGqMm72@khadija-virtual- machine/). When the "Subject" changes, > > > readers may not find the previous versions easily. > > > > > > On giovedì 16 marzo 2023 13:56:02 CET Khadija Kamran wrote: > > > > Module parameter, read_timeout, can only be set at the loading time. As > > > > it can only be modified once, initialize read_timeout once in the probe > > > > > > Substitute "probe" with "init". > > > > > > > function. > > > > > > > > As a result, only use read_timeout as the last argument in > > > > wait_event_interruptible_timeout() call. > > > > > > This two sentences are not much clear. I'd merge and rework: > > > > > > "Initialize the module parameters read_timeout and write_timeout once in > > > init(). > > > > > > Module parameters can only be set once and cannot be modified later, so we > > > don't need to evaluate them again when passing the parameters to > > > wait_event_interruptible_timeout()." > > > > > > > Convert datatpe > > > > > > s/datatpe/type/ > > > > > > > of read_timeout > > > > > > of {read,write}_timeout > > > > > > > from 'int' to 'long int' because > > > > implicit conversion of 'long int' to 'int' in statement 'read_timeout = > > > > MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT' results in an overflow warning. > > > > > > We don't care too much about the warning themselves: I mean, it overflows > > > and > > > you must avoid it to happen (as you are doing with the changes of types), > > > not > > > merely be interested in avoiding the warning. "[] results in an overflow." > > > is > > > all we care about. > > > > Hey Fabio! > > Thank you for your feedback. I have understood it and will make sure to > > send them in the next PATCH v6. > > Great to hear it! > > > > Add also the previous paragraph in the last part of the commit message. > > > > > > > Perform same steps formodule parameter, write_timeout. > > > > > > And instead delete the this last phrase. > > > > Can you please explain the above feedback. I am confused. What should I > > use instead of this last phrase? > > Sorry, I made a typo in the sentence above and that may confuse you :-( > > I just intended to suggest to delete "Perform same steps formodule parameter, > write_timeout.". > > In the previous lines I suggested you to merge and rework your entire commit > message. If you like it you are left with the following text (that I put for > you between two '"'): > > "Initialize the module parameters read_timeout and write_timeout once in > init(). > > Module parameters can only be set once and cannot be modified later, so we > don't need to evaluate them again when passing the parameters to > wait_event_interruptible_timeout(). > > Convert the type of {read,write}_timeout from 'int' to 'long int' because > implicit conversion of 'long int' to 'int' in statement 'read_timeout = > MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT' results in an overflow.". > > Just three small sentences are all you need (and don't forget to change the > Subject - "probe()" -> "init()". > > I hope I have been clearer this time. > If not, please ask for further clarification. > > Thanks, > > Fabio I put my signature here, but it was a mistake. Did you see the rest of the message below? > > > > Suggested-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Signed-off-by: Khadija Kamran <kamrankhadijadj@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > > > > > > > Changes in v5: > > > > - Convert timeout's datatype from int to long. > > > > > > > > Changes in v4: > > > > - Initialize timeouts once as suggested by Greg; this automatically > > > > > > > > fixes the indentation problems. > > > > > > > > - Change the subject and description. > > > > > > > > Changes in v3: > > > > - Fix grammatical mistakes > > > > - Do not change the second argument's indentation in split lines > > > > > > > > Changes in v2: > > > > - Instead of matching alignment to open parenthesis, align second and > > > > > > > > the last argument instead. > > > > > > > > - Change the subject to 'remove tabs to align arguments'. > > > > - Use imperative language in subject and description > > > > > > > > drivers/staging/axis-fifo/axis-fifo.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++---------- > > > > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > [snip] > > > > > >= words_to_write, > > > > > > What is this? You haven't yet compiled your patch. This unnecessary objection was due to that split I was talking about in the v6 of your patch. At first glance it looked to me like a remnant of some mistake with copy-pasting. Sorry, I should have looked at it more carefully. > > > Any further problems with enabling axis-fifo as a module? > > Sorry, my bad. Instead of fixing the menuconfig I used this command to > > remove the warnings: > > make -j"$(nproc)" ARCH=arm64 LLVM=1 drivers/staging/axis-fifo/ > > I thought it is compiling my module correctly. > > But I am working on your feedback. And before sending my next patch I > > will make sure to compile it properly. > > When you are done with build, install, and final reboot to test if your module > can "modprobe" or "insmod" (i.e. link with the running custom kernel you > built, installed and boot), try to compare the output of the following > commands: > > # uname -a > Linux suse 6.2.2-1-default #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Thu Mar 9 06:06:13 UTC 2023 > (44ca817) x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux > > AND > > # modinfo <name of the module you are testing here> > > I'm running "modinfo kvm" (but showing only two of many lines): > > # modinfo kvm > filename: /lib/modules/6.2.2-1-default/kernel/arch/x86/kvm/kvm.ko.zst > vermagic: 6.2.2-1-default SMP preempt mod_unload modversions > > Can you see that the kernel in "uname -a" and the filename and vermagic have > the same "6.2.2-1-default"? Well, so I'm sure I'm running the right Kernel and > inserted the appropriate "kvm" module. > > Furthermore, before rebooting your custom kernel, you may also look at the > directory in the Kernel where you compiled your module and search for "*.o" > "*mod*" and "*.ko" files. If you have them, you built your module properly. > > Thanks, > > Fabio Fabio
