From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
To: Alexander Duyck <aduyck@mirantis.com>
Cc: bhelgaas@google.com, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] iov: Variable and loop cleanup for sriov_disable and sriov_enable
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2015 16:43:49 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151029214349.GC921@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151027205233.14626.98836.stgit@localhost.localdomain>
Hi Alex,
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 01:52:33PM -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> This patch is just a minor cleanup to go through and group all of the
> variables into one declaration instead of a long string of single
> declarations for each int. It also changes the direction for a couple
> loops as we are able to loop with less code this way as testing against 0
> can be done as a part of the decrement operation.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexander Duyck <aduyck@mirantis.com>
> ---
> drivers/pci/iov.c | 13 ++++---------
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/iov.c b/drivers/pci/iov.c
> index cecc242c1af0..c0fc88fa7c4d 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/iov.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/iov.c
> @@ -241,15 +241,11 @@ int __weak pcibios_sriov_disable(struct pci_dev *pdev)
>
> static int sriov_enable(struct pci_dev *dev, int nr_virtfn)
> {
> - int rc;
> - int i;
> - int nres;
> u16 offset, stride, initial;
> struct resource *res;
> struct pci_dev *pdev;
> struct pci_sriov *iov = dev->sriov;
> - int bars = 0;
> - int bus;
> + int rc, i, nres, bars, bus;
I don't have a strong opinion on combining the declarations to one line,
and I would apply it if you wanted to do the same for the whole file
at once, in a patch by itself.
> if (!nr_virtfn)
> return 0;
> @@ -271,8 +267,7 @@ static int sriov_enable(struct pci_dev *dev, int nr_virtfn)
> if (!offset || (nr_virtfn > 1 && !stride))
> return -EIO;
>
> - nres = 0;
> - for (i = 0; i < PCI_SRIOV_NUM_BARS; i++) {
> + for (nres = 0, bars = 0, i = PCI_SRIOV_NUM_BARS; i--;) {
But I don't agree that this is easier to read. I suppose it could be
a tiny bit more efficient, but I think the benefit to the reader of
the usual "for (i = 0; i < limit; i++)" loop is larger.
> bars |= (1 << (i + PCI_IOV_RESOURCES));
> res = &dev->resource[i + PCI_IOV_RESOURCES];
> if (res->parent)
> @@ -366,13 +361,13 @@ err_pcibios:
>
> static void sriov_disable(struct pci_dev *dev)
> {
> - int i;
> struct pci_sriov *iov = dev->sriov;
> + int i = iov->num_VFs;
>
> if (!iov->num_VFs)
> return;
>
> - for (i = 0; i < iov->num_VFs; i++)
> + while (i--)
> virtfn_remove(dev, i, 0);
I do like the change to remove devices in the reverse order as we
added them. But I'm really partial to the way a "for" loop keeps all
the loop control in one spot. So I would apply a patch that made it
look like this:
for (i = iov->num_VFs - 1; i >= 0; i--)
virtfn_remove(dev, i, 0);
> pcibios_sriov_disable(dev);
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-10-29 21:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-10-27 20:52 [PATCH 0/5] Various of SR-IOV fixes and cleanup Alexander Duyck
2015-10-27 20:52 ` [PATCH 1/5] iov: Update virtfn_max_buses to validate offset and stride Alexander Duyck
2015-10-28 16:32 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2015-10-28 17:57 ` Alexander Duyck
2015-10-28 18:43 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2015-10-28 21:46 ` Alexander Duyck
2015-10-29 19:50 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2015-10-27 20:52 ` [PATCH 2/5] iov: Reset resources to 0 if totalVFs increases after enabling ARI Alexander Duyck
2015-10-28 16:37 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2015-10-28 18:32 ` Alexander Duyck
2015-10-28 19:52 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2015-10-28 21:37 ` Alexander Duyck
2015-10-27 20:52 ` [PATCH 3/5] iov: Fix sriov_enable exception handling path Alexander Duyck
2015-10-29 16:32 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2015-10-29 16:54 ` Alex Duyck
2015-10-29 20:41 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2015-10-27 20:52 ` [PATCH 4/5] iov: Variable and loop cleanup for sriov_disable and sriov_enable Alexander Duyck
2015-10-29 21:43 ` Bjorn Helgaas [this message]
2015-10-29 23:19 ` Alexander Duyck
2015-10-27 20:52 ` [PATCH 5/5] iov: Update sriov_enable to correctly handle offset and stride Alexander Duyck
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=20151029214349.GC921@localhost \
--to=helgaas@kernel.org \
--cc=aduyck@mirantis.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@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).