On 2021/7/5 10:43, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 02-07-21, 12:58, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
On Fri, Jul 02, 2021 at 04:46:47PM +0800, Jie Deng wrote:
+static int virtio_i2c_complete_reqs(struct virtqueue *vq,
+ struct virtio_i2c_req *reqs,
+ struct i2c_msg *msgs, int nr,
+ bool fail)
+{
+ struct virtio_i2c_req *req;
+ bool failed = fail;
Jie, you can actually get rid of this variable too. Jut rename fail to failed
and everything shall work as you want.
Oh, You are not right. I just found we can't remove this variable. The
"fail" and "failed" have different
meanings for this function. We need fail to return the result.
+ unsigned int len;
+ int i, j = 0;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < nr; i++) {
+ /* Detach the ith request from the vq */
+ req = virtqueue_get_buf(vq, &len);
+
+ /*
+ * Condition (req && req == &reqs[i]) should always meet since
+ * we have total nr requests in the vq.
+ */
+ if (!failed && (WARN_ON(!(req && req == &reqs[i])) ||
+ (req->in_hdr.status != VIRTIO_I2C_MSG_OK)))
+ failed = true;
...and after failed is true, we are continuing the loop, why?
Actually this function can be called with fail set to true. We proceed as we
need to call i2c_put_dma_safe_msg_buf() for all buffers we allocated earlier.
+ i2c_put_dma_safe_msg_buf(reqs[i].buf, &msgs[i], !failed);
+ if (!failed)
+ ++j;
Besides better to read j++ the j itself can be renamed to something more
verbose.
+ }
+ return (fail ? -ETIMEDOUT : j);
Redundant parentheses.
+}
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
