From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-ej1-f54.google.com (mail-ej1-f54.google.com [209.85.218.54]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DD17215EFC9; Tue, 9 Jul 2024 15:15:28 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.218.54 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1720538130; cv=none; b=f4KANkvretFjDr/hUHzKINTYEQ7Cud2dsbO0R5qhOQK4BeuWUPcNgCBDD5N1VswqBeRYNDXEYKak+btM0KswonG2zKPiMkJqRGLnVaj+0Rm1KIGEZAP1a25+kX1A/jyZQh54KKyVvYK0y4CavfgxnnaiU5LAO0is2jQ7TZggOag= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1720538130; c=relaxed/simple; bh=NxYiReVyL7Qx3FKsMTdfYtPeRiBpPB4fnwq6SS2LE3g=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=YZiDEvZSjOF3ltwpYN+y31QhzmH/s3uOxGmMoupxLb9kxK6/mgQp03xQvHoBUlMwnCZW8q8Qqk01Bw/73OOlfGMi202IjHmYqvdZOKBekToOvaySynblcqIe5HSIBeKA9jCHKei4bOFs+KCBwKd3faoQTlmgxWOinaW/cpCIndk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=debian.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.218.54 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=debian.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Received: by mail-ej1-f54.google.com with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-a7523f0870cso647999866b.3; Tue, 09 Jul 2024 08:15:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1720538127; x=1721142927; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=udOmhMw6nVnLDB7CnXYCG2+/atZ0tO+NBuzOh1Ic4BU=; b=gCE7QuR5u5bBKJdks93X1YOkzZe2CSMJmeEiBHCiX3g0KvZdittOlXH3GsRCH+V25u 4XeggmJzpe6K2yc2CHVmP2MFhjptWuIW97czkFyPVwgKkS5FmUycvcQFkDlhEFzc7dkj B3zl8MQa7VBz4e/lI0PMAM+or97bc/wVKqZvd3e+UK/iNKX3DnTdqWyDRJYZL2BYfwxk oYTDnfz5LtKUSBCNPnCXROQ4LymesPz9ZzXVBo+zN5OvhsNrGJUlff4OTXy8xs138M8d Oj70T6HO2ITYhtNrH2LmxbSJK7aEPDbhC514vc5mam3F0TpUBpsFoKGEi8XhO65vg8XE uwRg== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCXdoCLq5BQD/z2huVCQ21/0wH92+0kpF1S3Lv6XM5Hfl139ow6qRXBqSE97aTZXhfHyiSHaTNQ5HNJkjpJxeIw6h0Cr/dU5vfXLF617bCZOxTWMpR1l8F6ht/Ibt7o637KaqWw= X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzbDlDy5wQvGbPcF0VtoUeezVUU3pgkdtvMuEmzSpNr9K1Ebtzt K7JqP3Md7ir9BWt3VwN345cs/QQ2wVImKA6niGhkq7r1dWmWzIRZ X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IF35/Mch11jtk1xVIeWdVFdvciZZUw5TTShgdZrcKMKdHljQsWt+u2oBbViFk5ZTk6F/AOa7g== X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:c083:b0:a6f:49b1:dec5 with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-a780b705231mr177181466b.46.1720538126122; Tue, 09 Jul 2024 08:15:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gmail.com (fwdproxy-lla-001.fbsv.net. [2a03:2880:30ff:1::face:b00c]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a640c23a62f3a-a780a853a62sm83568866b.157.2024.07.09.08.15.25 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 09 Jul 2024 08:15:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2024 08:15:23 -0700 From: Breno Leitao To: Vladimir Oltean Cc: kernel test robot , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, llvm@lists.linux.dev, oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev, kuba@kernel.org, horms@kernel.org, Roy.Pledge@nxp.com, open list Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] soc: fsl: qbman: FSL_DPAA depends on COMPILE_TEST Message-ID: References: <20240624162128.1665620-1-leitao@debian.org> <202406261920.l5pzM1rj-lkp@intel.com> <20240626140623.7ebsspddqwc24ne4@skbuf> <20240708133746.ea62kkeq2inzcos5@skbuf> <20240709135811.c7tqh3ocfumg6ctt@skbuf> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: llvm@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20240709135811.c7tqh3ocfumg6ctt@skbuf> Hello Vladimir, On Tue, Jul 09, 2024 at 04:58:11PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > On Mon, Jul 08, 2024 at 12:08:05PM -0700, Breno Leitao wrote: > > I thought about a patch like the following (compile tested only). What > > do you think? > > To be honest, there are several things I don't really like about this > patch. > > - I really struggled with applying it in the current format. Could you > please post the output of git format-patch in the future? This is the output of `git format-patch` shifted right by a tab. > - You addressed dpaa_set_coalesce() but not also dpaa_fq_setup() > - You misrepresented the patch content by saying you only allocate size > for online CPUs in the commit message. But you allocate for all > possible CPUs. > - You only kfree(needs_revert) in the error (revert_values) case, but > not in the normal (return 0) case. > - The netdev coding style is to sort the lines with variable > declarations in reverse order of line length (they call this "reverse > Christmas tree"). Your patch broke that order. > - You should use kcalloc() instead of kmalloc_array() + memset() > > I have prepared and tested the attached alternative patch on a board and > I am preparing to submit it myself, if you don't have any objection. Sure, not a problem. You just asked how that would be possible, and I decided to craft patch to show what I had in mind. I am glad we have a way moving forward. Thanks for solving it. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A1842C2BD09 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2024 15:15:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4WJPhB2PvDz3dSM for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2024 01:15:54 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=debian.org Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com (client-ip=209.85.208.42; helo=mail-ed1-f42.google.com; envelope-from=breno.debian@gmail.com; receiver=lists.ozlabs.org) Received: from mail-ed1-f42.google.com (mail-ed1-f42.google.com [209.85.208.42]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4WJPgk3fTXz30Wf for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2024 01:15:30 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-ed1-f42.google.com with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-58b966b4166so6334114a12.1 for ; Tue, 09 Jul 2024 08:15:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1720538127; x=1721142927; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=udOmhMw6nVnLDB7CnXYCG2+/atZ0tO+NBuzOh1Ic4BU=; b=IJEChFYTsvLKU2KBLrfOHxWf2BF3YGcjFt8J5Z2YcorXVBHqOMJx1tDENPddy0yHVd 0ue+8ew2ylEJZt43C8djFeDiU8eFF9du6m5e2eIaDe5pWcPbjCZ/K4VX06sCN7SyBM5V 4/CRpi8oto7jX0IUrOiU/5rAEjgtrQbeo42gH6W9kzbxW1u4rYJCBjgC5AgbQRTck1Mq G1pYwwb+tCEq8GjUNP4I25AW4BC7/UW0zxrjEZASGSmP5Nd/Ze/5xapTxXkTWlD/cjz8 r/EWZSVM88Ws1JbhdW0rpXlwUAVmrMxop8S/T32DRWvxoAoxt4IfyKYRdZRQ5WhC1ot0 Kd3A== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCU0S+zjXI1ntpLOqqvcZai6XoEzdPSiab8crSrAorpfCHTdS/dkxj9I4M+mAb/QQvm5uPx8QGS8SFGYQPxE1W2khMXR5Qa7+4C09aINdg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yyo1KbKwh2UMV9G3R7a/aJcZghnJCT5eWDM0lBdohjTbUueHqen fWQBIG46KOcUhLMs+HtKUqCmaJKf8K/YyF2hpGPLfQKvyVXrvc4K X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IF35/Mch11jtk1xVIeWdVFdvciZZUw5TTShgdZrcKMKdHljQsWt+u2oBbViFk5ZTk6F/AOa7g== X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:c083:b0:a6f:49b1:dec5 with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-a780b705231mr177181466b.46.1720538126122; Tue, 09 Jul 2024 08:15:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gmail.com (fwdproxy-lla-001.fbsv.net. [2a03:2880:30ff:1::face:b00c]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a640c23a62f3a-a780a853a62sm83568866b.157.2024.07.09.08.15.25 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 09 Jul 2024 08:15:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2024 08:15:23 -0700 From: Breno Leitao To: Vladimir Oltean Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] soc: fsl: qbman: FSL_DPAA depends on COMPILE_TEST Message-ID: References: <20240624162128.1665620-1-leitao@debian.org> <202406261920.l5pzM1rj-lkp@intel.com> <20240626140623.7ebsspddqwc24ne4@skbuf> <20240708133746.ea62kkeq2inzcos5@skbuf> <20240709135811.c7tqh3ocfumg6ctt@skbuf> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20240709135811.c7tqh3ocfumg6ctt@skbuf> X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: kernel test robot , netdev@vger.kernel.org, Roy.Pledge@nxp.com, llvm@lists.linux.dev, open list , horms@kernel.org, oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev, kuba@kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" Hello Vladimir, On Tue, Jul 09, 2024 at 04:58:11PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > On Mon, Jul 08, 2024 at 12:08:05PM -0700, Breno Leitao wrote: > > I thought about a patch like the following (compile tested only). What > > do you think? > > To be honest, there are several things I don't really like about this > patch. > > - I really struggled with applying it in the current format. Could you > please post the output of git format-patch in the future? This is the output of `git format-patch` shifted right by a tab. > - You addressed dpaa_set_coalesce() but not also dpaa_fq_setup() > - You misrepresented the patch content by saying you only allocate size > for online CPUs in the commit message. But you allocate for all > possible CPUs. > - You only kfree(needs_revert) in the error (revert_values) case, but > not in the normal (return 0) case. > - The netdev coding style is to sort the lines with variable > declarations in reverse order of line length (they call this "reverse > Christmas tree"). Your patch broke that order. > - You should use kcalloc() instead of kmalloc_array() + memset() > > I have prepared and tested the attached alternative patch on a board and > I am preparing to submit it myself, if you don't have any objection. Sure, not a problem. You just asked how that would be possible, and I decided to craft patch to show what I had in mind. I am glad we have a way moving forward. Thanks for solving it.