From: Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, driver-core@lists.linux.dev,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
Danilo Krummrich <dakr@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] regmap: irq: Get rid of duplicate check in regmap_del_irq_chip()
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2026 16:16:07 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <atoap3uV702MXAjB@hovoldconsulting.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <atoPG1nCj9yF_eEt@sirena.org.uk>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1044 bytes --]
On Thu, Oct 22, 2026 at 02:26:51PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2026 at 10:13:57AM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 21, 2026 at 10:50:35PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > irq_dispose_mapping() already 0-aware, so there is no need to
> > > perform the same test outside of the call. Get rid of duplicate
> > > check in regmap_del_irq_chip().
>
> > > - virq = irq_find_mapping(d->domain, hwirq);
> > > - if (virq)
> > > - irq_dispose_mapping(virq);
> > > + irq_dispose_mapping(irq_find_mapping(d->domain, hwirq));
>
> > This just makes the code less readable, and for no good reason.
>
> Is there intended to be a benefit from the error check? It seems like a
> microopotimisation that just removes robustness from something that
> really should not be a hot path.
The code as it stands is easier to read and obviously correct (and
matches the preceding comment); you don't need look up the definition of
irq_dispose_mapping() and parse a ternary conditional to determine that.
Johan
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 265 bytes --]
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-22 14:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-21 20:50 [PATCH v1 1/1] regmap: irq: Get rid of duplicate check in regmap_del_irq_chip() Andy Shevchenko
2026-10-22 8:13 ` Johan Hovold
2026-10-22 13:26 ` Mark Brown
2026-10-22 14:16 ` Johan Hovold [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=atoap3uV702MXAjB@hovoldconsulting.com \
--to=johan@kernel.org \
--cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=dakr@kernel.org \
--cc=driver-core@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.