From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org (Srinivas Kandagatla) Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2018 16:26:27 +0000 Subject: [RESEND PATCH v2 03/15] ASoC: qcom: qdsp6: Add common qdsp6 helper functions In-Reply-To: <20180102001907.GL478@tuxbook> References: <20171214173402.19074-1-srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org> <20171214173402.19074-4-srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org> <20180102001907.GL478@tuxbook> Message-ID: <48c31cb9-b4b6-2f22-6e07-ee1e47b9ca88@linaro.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Thanks for the review comments, On 02/01/18 00:19, Bjorn Andersson wrote: > On Thu 14 Dec 09:33 PST 2017, srinivas.kandagatla at linaro.org wrote: >> +static inline int q6dsp_map_channels(u8 *ch_map, int ch) >> +{ >> + memset(ch_map, 0, PCM_FORMAT_MAX_NUM_CHANNEL); > > This implies that ch_map is always an array of > PCM_FORMAT_MAX_NUM_CHANNEL elements. As such it would be better to > express this in the prototype; i.e u8 ch_map[PCM_FORMAT_MAX_NUM_CHANNEL] > Yep, Will do that. >> + >> + if (ch == 1) { > > This is a switch statement. > Yes, makes more sense. >> + ch_map[0] = PCM_CHANNEL_FC; >> + } else if (ch == 2) { > [..] >> +struct adsp_err_code { >> + int lnx_err_code; > > Indentation, and these could be given more succinct names. > >> + char *adsp_err_str; >> +}; >> + >> +static struct adsp_err_code adsp_err_code_info[ADSP_ERR_MAX+1] = { >> + { 0, ADSP_EOK_STR}, >> + { -ENOTRECOVERABLE, ADSP_EFAILED_STR}, >> + { -EINVAL, ADSP_EBADPARAM_STR}, >> + { -ENOSYS, ADSP_EUNSUPPORTED_STR}, >> + { -ENOPROTOOPT, ADSP_EVERSION_STR}, >> + { -ENOTRECOVERABLE, ADSP_EUNEXPECTED_STR}, >> + { -ENOTRECOVERABLE, ADSP_EPANIC_STR}, >> + { -ENOSPC, ADSP_ENORESOURCE_STR}, >> + { -EBADR, ADSP_EHANDLE_STR}, >> + { -EALREADY, ADSP_EALREADY_STR}, >> + { -EPERM, ADSP_ENOTREADY_STR}, >> + { -EINPROGRESS, ADSP_EPENDING_STR}, >> + { -EBUSY, ADSP_EBUSY_STR}, >> + { -ECANCELED, ADSP_EABORTED_STR}, >> + { -EAGAIN, ADSP_EPREEMPTED_STR}, >> + { -EAGAIN, ADSP_ECONTINUE_STR}, >> + { -EAGAIN, ADSP_EIMMEDIATE_STR}, >> + { -EAGAIN, ADSP_ENOTIMPL_STR}, >> + { -ENODATA, ADSP_ENEEDMORE_STR}, >> + { -EADV, ADSP_ERR_MAX_STR}, > > This, element 0x13, is not listed among the defined errors. Is this a > placeholder? > > How about making this even more descriptive by using the format > > [ADSP_EBADPARAM] = { -EINVAL, ADSP_EBADPARAM_STR }, > > That way the mapping table is self-describing. > > And you can use ARRAY_SIZE() instead of specifying the fixed size of > ADSP_ERR_MAX + 1... > Will give that a try! >> + { -ENOMEM, ADSP_ENOMEMORY_STR}, >> + { -ENODEV, ADSP_ENOTEXIST_STR}, >> + { -EADV, ADSP_ERR_MAX_STR}, > > "Advertise error"? No, downstream seems to define any unexpected error as -EADV, am not sure if this correct, probably we should change this to be more sensible one. > >> +}; >> + >> +static inline int adsp_err_get_lnx_err_code(u32 adsp_error) > > Can this be made internal to some c-file? So that any third party deals > only with linux error codes? > > > How about renaming this q6dsp_errno()? > yep will do that. >> +{ >> + if (adsp_error > ADSP_ERR_MAX) >> + return adsp_err_code_info[ADSP_ERR_MAX].lnx_err_code; >> + else >> + return adsp_err_code_info[adsp_error].lnx_err_code; > > I think this would look better if you assign a local variable and have a > single return. And just hard code the "invalid error code" errno, rather > than looking up ADSP_ERR_MAX in the list. > >> +} >> + >> +static inline char *adsp_err_get_err_str(u32 adsp_error) > > q6dsp_strerror(), to match strerror(3)? yep! > >> +{ >> + if (adsp_error > ADSP_ERR_MAX) >> + return adsp_err_code_info[ADSP_ERR_MAX].adsp_err_str; >> + else >> + return adsp_err_code_info[adsp_error].adsp_err_str; > > And I do think that, as with strerror, this should return a human > readable error, not the stringified define. okay! > >> +} > > > I'm puzzled to why these helper functions lives in a header file, at > least some aspects of this would better be hidden... Will try to improve on this in next version. > > Regards, > Bjorn >