On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 6:31 PM, Andrey Ryabinin
<aryabinin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 01/27/2017 06:42 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 4:27 PM, Andrey Ryabinin
>> <aryabinin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEBUG_FS)
>>> @@ -234,12 +230,8 @@ static const struct file_operations pmc_core_ppfear_ops = {
>>> /* This function should return link status, 0 means ready */
>>> static int pmc_core_mtpmc_link_status(void)
>>> {
>>> - struct pmc_dev *pmcdev = &pmc;
>>> - u32 value;
>>> -
>>> - value = pmc_core_reg_read(pmcdev, SPT_PMC_PM_STS_OFFSET);
>>> - return test_bit(SPT_PMC_MSG_FULL_STS_BIT,
>>> - (unsigned long *)&value);
>>> + u32 value = pmc_core_reg_read(&pmc, SPT_PMC_PM_STS_OFFSET);
>>> + return value & (1U << SPT_PMC_MSG_FULL_STS_BIT);
>>> }
>>
>> Thanks for the patch. IIRC I told (or may be forgot to tell) them
>> during internal review about the nasty casting.
>>
>> Btw, have you checked this will work in the same way, since test_bit()
>> is atomic?
>
> 'value' is a local variable, atomicity is pointless here.
Ah, indeed.
>> And if it's okay, why not to use BIT() macro?
> It just a matter of taste. I find open-coded variant easier to read.
Okay, what I'm about to do:
- switch to BIT() macro (it's already used by the driver)
- revert unrelated changes (piece of code where we get value)
and push it to testing.
Tell me if you have any objections.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
