Linux ACPI
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: luanshi <zhangliguang@linux.alibaba.com>,
	James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
	Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
	linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPI / APEI: Remove needless __ghes_check_estatus() calls
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2019 17:18:26 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190621151826.GA19067@zn.tnic> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1560749129-26288-1-git-send-email-zhangliguang@linux.alibaba.com>

On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 01:25:29PM +0800, luanshi wrote:
> Function __ghes_check_estatus() is called after __ghes_peek_estatus(),
> but it is already called in __ghes_peek_estatus(). So we should remove
> some needless __ghes_check_estatus() calls.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Liguang Zhang <zhangliguang@linux.alibaba.com>
> ---
>  drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c | 10 ----------
>  1 file changed, 10 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c b/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c
> index 993940d..1041a4d 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c
> @@ -372,10 +372,6 @@ static int ghes_read_estatus(struct ghes *ghes,
>  	if (rc)
>  		return rc;
>  
> -	rc = __ghes_check_estatus(ghes, estatus);
> -	if (rc)
> -		return rc;
> -
>  	return __ghes_read_estatus(estatus, *buf_paddr, fixmap_idx,
>  				   cper_estatus_len(estatus));
>  }
> @@ -882,12 +878,6 @@ static int ghes_in_nmi_queue_one_entry(struct ghes *ghes,
>  		return rc;
>  	}
>  
> -	rc = __ghes_check_estatus(ghes, &tmp_header);
> -	if (rc) {
> -		ghes_clear_estatus(ghes, &tmp_header, buf_paddr, fixmap_idx);
> -		return rc;
> -	}
> -
>  	len = cper_estatus_len(&tmp_header);
>  	node_len = GHES_ESTATUS_NODE_LEN(len);
>  	estatus_node = (void *)gen_pool_alloc(ghes_estatus_pool, node_len);
> -- 

Yah, looks correct to me.

James, I think the cleaner thing to do would be for
__ghes_peek_estatus() not to call __ghes_check_estatus() at the end but
to return success and we can keep the two functions - "peek" and "check"
status - separate and always do:

	if (peek)
		return ...;

	if (check)
		return ...;

because this way the checking remains separate in __ghes_check_estatus()
and so is the peeking in __ghes_peek_estatus().

We can merge the two functions because we always do peek and then check
but keeping them separate makes the code clearer.

Am I making some sense...?

Thx.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.

  reply	other threads:[~2019-06-21 15:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-06-17  5:25 [PATCH] ACPI / APEI: Remove needless __ghes_check_estatus() calls luanshi
2019-06-21 15:18 ` Borislav Petkov [this message]
2019-06-24 17:32   ` James Morse

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=20190621151826.GA19067@zn.tnic \
    --to=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=james.morse@arm.com \
    --cc=lenb@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
    --cc=zhangliguang@linux.alibaba.com \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox