linux-arm-msm.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>
To: Li Zhengyu <lizhengyu3@huawei.com>, quic_tdas@quicinc.com
Cc: agross@kernel.org, bjorn.andersson@linaro.org,
	linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: qcom: clk-rpmh: Fix if statement to match comment
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2022 12:58:54 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220610195856.A2D7EC3411C@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220531094539.252642-1-lizhengyu3@huawei.com>

Quoting Li Zhengyu (2022-05-31 02:45:39)
> (c->state) is u32, (enable) is bool. It returns false when
> (c->state) > 1 and (enable) is true. Convert (c->state) to bool.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Li Zhengyu <lizhengyu3@huawei.com>

Nice catch! It looks like it fixes an optimization, where we don't want
to run through and check has_state_changed() if this clk is already
enabled or disabled. But how does this ever happen? The clk framework
already reference counts prepare/unprepare, so how can we get into this
function when the condition would be true, after this patch?

I think we can simply remove the if condition entirely. Do you agree?

> ---
>  drivers/clk/qcom/clk-rpmh.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-rpmh.c b/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-rpmh.c
> index aed907982344..851e127432a9 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-rpmh.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-rpmh.c
> @@ -196,7 +196,7 @@ static int clk_rpmh_aggregate_state_send_command(struct clk_rpmh *c,
>         int ret;
>  
>         /* Nothing required to be done if already off or on */
> -       if (enable == c->state)
> +       if (enable == !!c->state)
>                 return 0;
>  
>         c->state = enable ? c->valid_state_mask : 0;

  reply	other threads:[~2022-06-10 19:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-05-31  9:45 [PATCH] clk: qcom: clk-rpmh: Fix if statement to match comment Li Zhengyu
2022-06-10 19:58 ` Stephen Boyd [this message]
2022-06-13  3:50   ` lizhengyu (E)

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=20220610195856.A2D7EC3411C@smtp.kernel.org \
    --to=sboyd@kernel.org \
    --cc=agross@kernel.org \
    --cc=bjorn.andersson@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-clk@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lizhengyu3@huawei.com \
    --cc=quic_tdas@quicinc.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).