On Sun, Mar 01, 2020 at 12:44:26PM -0800, Gayatri Kammela wrote:
> Currently pmc_core_lpm_display() uses array of struct pointers i.e.,
> tgl_lpm_maps for Tiger Lake directly to iterate through and to get the
> number of status/live status registers which is hardcoded and cannot
> be re-used for future platforms that support sub-states. To maintain
> readability, make pmc_core_lpm_display() generic, so that it can re-used
> for future platforms.
My comments below.
...
> +static int pmc_core_lpm_get_arr_size(const struct pmc_bit_map **maps)
> +{
> + int idx, arr_size = 0;
And why do you need arr_size variable at all?
> +
> + for (idx = 0; maps[idx]; idx++)
> + arr_size++;
> +
> + return arr_size;
> +}
...
> - int index, idx, len = 32, bit_mask;
> + int index, idx, bit_mask, len = 32;
What's the point of shuffling this?
> + int arr_size = pmc_core_lpm_get_arr_size(maps);
This would be better in a split manner, i.e.
int arr_size;
...
arr_size = ...;
...
> + lpm_regs = kmalloc_array(arr_size, sizeof(*lpm_regs), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if(!lpm_regs)
> + goto err;
There is no point to have the label. Simple return will work.
> - for (index = 0; tgl_lpm_maps[index]; index++) {
> + for (index = 0; maps[index]; index++) {
Why not to reuse arr_size here?
> lpm_regs[index] = pmc_core_reg_read(pmcdev, offset);
> offset += 4;
> }
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
