From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: okaya@codeaurora.org (Sinan Kaya) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2015 23:55:02 -0500 Subject: [PATCH V3 3/4] dmaselftest: add memcpy selftest support functions In-Reply-To: References: <1446958380-23298-1-git-send-email-okaya@codeaurora.org> <1446958380-23298-4-git-send-email-okaya@codeaurora.org> <56400DD4.5080506@codeaurora.org> Message-ID: <564178A5.6080603@codeaurora.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 11/9/2015 4:26 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 5:07 AM, Sinan Kaya wrote: >> >> >> On 11/8/2015 3:09 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote: >>> >>> On Sun, Nov 8, 2015 at 6:52 AM, Sinan Kaya wrote: >>>> >>>> This patch adds supporting utility functions >>>> for selftest. The intention is to share the self >>>> test code between different drivers. >>>> >>>> Supported test cases include: >>>> 1. dma_map_single >>>> 2. streaming DMA >>>> 3. coherent DMA >>>> 4. scatter-gather DMA >>> >>> > >>>> + u32 i, j = 0; >>> >>> unsigned int >> >> why? > > Is i or j is going to be used for HW communication? No? What about > assignment to a values of type u32? No? Plain counters? Use plain > types. OK. I did an internal code review before posting the patch. Nobody complained about iterator types. I am trying to find what goes as a good practice vs. what is personal style. > > It's actually comment about your all patches I saw last week. > >>>> + int err = 0; >>>> + int ret; >>> >>> >>> Any reason to have two instead of one of similar meaning? >>> >> >> removed ret > > Don't forget to check if it's redundant assignment (check in all your > patches as well). > I'll look. -- Sinan Kaya Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project