From: Frank Praznik <frank.praznik@gmail.com>
To: Antonio Ospite <ao2@ao2.it>
Cc: linux-input@vger.kernel.org, jkosina@suse.cz
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] hid: sony: Refactor output report sending functions
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2015 10:59:34 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5640C2E6.3090201@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151109150241.e8c09e8f6b5a319be38f604c@ao2.it>
On 11/9/2015 09:02, Antonio Ospite wrote:
> On Sat, 7 Nov 2015 10:12:09 -0500
> Frank Praznik <frank.praznik@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Refactor output report sending functions to allow for the sending of
>> output reports without enqueing a work item. Output reports for any device
> ^
> enqueuing or enqueueing :)
>
>> can now be sent by calling the sony_send_output_report function which will
>> automatically dispatch the request to the appropriate output function. The
>> individual state worker functions have been replaced with a universal
>> sony_state_worker function which calls sony_send_output_report.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Frank Praznik <frank.praznik@gmail.com>
> Looks good to me, just one comment below.
>
>> ---
>> drivers/hid/hid-sony.c | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
>> 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/hid/hid-sony.c b/drivers/hid/hid-sony.c
>> index 661f94f..b84b2ce 100644
>> --- a/drivers/hid/hid-sony.c
>> +++ b/drivers/hid/hid-sony.c
>> @@ -1782,7 +1782,7 @@ error_leds:
>> return ret;
>> }
>>
>> -static void sixaxis_state_worker(struct work_struct *work)
>> +static void sixaxis_send_output_report(struct sony_sc *sc)
>> {
>> static const union sixaxis_output_report_01 default_report = {
>> .buf = {
>> @@ -1796,7 +1796,6 @@ static void sixaxis_state_worker(struct work_struct *work)
>> 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00
>> }
>> };
>> - struct sony_sc *sc = container_of(work, struct sony_sc, state_worker);
>> struct sixaxis_output_report *report =
>> (struct sixaxis_output_report *)sc->output_report_dmabuf;
>> int n;
>> @@ -1839,9 +1838,8 @@ static void sixaxis_state_worker(struct work_struct *work)
>> HID_OUTPUT_REPORT, HID_REQ_SET_REPORT);
>> }
>>
>> -static void dualshock4_state_worker(struct work_struct *work)
>> +static void dualshock4_send_output_report(struct sony_sc *sc)
>> {
>> - struct sony_sc *sc = container_of(work, struct sony_sc, state_worker);
>> struct hid_device *hdev = sc->hdev;
>> __u8 *buf = sc->output_report_dmabuf;
>> int offset;
>> @@ -1886,9 +1884,8 @@ static void dualshock4_state_worker(struct work_struct *work)
>> HID_OUTPUT_REPORT, HID_REQ_SET_REPORT);
>> }
>>
>> -static void motion_state_worker(struct work_struct *work)
>> +static void motion_send_output_report(struct sony_sc *sc)
>> {
>> - struct sony_sc *sc = container_of(work, struct sony_sc, state_worker);
>> struct hid_device *hdev = sc->hdev;
>> struct motion_output_report_02 *report =
>> (struct motion_output_report_02 *)sc->output_report_dmabuf;
>> @@ -1907,6 +1904,23 @@ static void motion_state_worker(struct work_struct *work)
>> hid_hw_output_report(hdev, (__u8 *)report, MOTION_REPORT_0x02_SIZE);
>> }
>>
>> +static void sony_send_output_report(struct sony_sc *sc)
>> +{
>> + if (sc->quirks & DUALSHOCK4_CONTROLLER)
>> + dualshock4_send_output_report(sc);
>> + else if ((sc->quirks & SIXAXIS_CONTROLLER) ||
>> + (sc->quirks & NAVIGATION_CONTROLLER))
>> + sixaxis_send_output_report(sc);
>> + else if (sc->quirks & MOTION_CONTROLLER)
>> + motion_send_output_report(sc);
>> +}
> We could have have a function pointer to a send_output_report callback
> in struct sony_sc, set the appropriate call back in sony_probe() once
> and for all and drop sony_send_output_report() which is identifying
> again the device, something we already did in sony_probe().
> Just an idea for a more declarative approach, but this way is OK too.
>
>> +
>> +static void sony_state_worker(struct work_struct *work)
>> +{
>> + struct sony_sc *sc = container_of(work, struct sony_sc, state_worker);
>> + sony_send_output_report(sc);
> this would become:
>
> sc->send_output_report(sc);
>
> same as in patch 2/2.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Antonio
>
Hi Antonio,
I like your suggestion. One pointer dereference vs several branches
should be faster and cleaner. I'll do a v2 which implements this and
fixes the commit typos when I have some time in the next day or two.
Regards,
Frank
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-11-09 15:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-11-07 15:12 [PATCH 0/2] hid: sony: Clear and restore controller state on suspend and resume Frank Praznik
2015-11-07 15:12 ` [PATCH 1/2] hid: sony: Refactor output report sending functions Frank Praznik
2015-11-09 14:02 ` Antonio Ospite
2015-11-09 15:59 ` Frank Praznik [this message]
2015-11-07 15:12 ` [PATCH 2/2] hid: sony: Save and restore controller state on suspend and resume Frank Praznik
2015-11-09 14:03 ` Antonio Ospite
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=5640C2E6.3090201@gmail.com \
--to=frank.praznik@gmail.com \
--cc=ao2@ao2.it \
--cc=jkosina@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-input@vger.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 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).