Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 10/15] nvdimm acpi: abstract the operations for root device and nvdimm devices

[Xiao Guangrong <guangrong.xiao@linux.intel.com>]

On 03/17/2016 06:35 PM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 04:32:56PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
>> +static void
>> +nvdimm_dsm_function0(uint32_t supported_func, hwaddr dsm_mem_addr)
>> +{
>> +    NvdimmDsmFunc0Out func0 = {
>> +        .len = cpu_to_le32(sizeof(func0)),
>> +        .supported_func = cpu_to_le32(supported_func),
>> +    };
>> +    cpu_physical_memory_write(dsm_mem_addr, &func0, sizeof(func0));
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void
>> +nvdimm_dsm_no_payload(uint32_t func_ret_status, hwaddr dsm_mem_addr)
>> +{
>> +    NvdimmDsmFuncNoPayloadOut out = {
>> +        .len = cpu_to_le32(sizeof(out)),
>> +        .func_ret_status = cpu_to_le32(func_ret_status),
>> +    };
>> +    cpu_physical_memory_write(dsm_mem_addr, &out, sizeof(out));
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void nvdimm_dsm_root(NvdimmDsmIn *in, hwaddr dsm_mem_addr)
>> +{
>> +    /*
>> +     * function 0 is called to inquire which functions are supported by
>> +     * OSPM
>> +     */
>> +    if (!in->function) {
>> +        return nvdimm_dsm_function0(0 /* No function supported other
>> +                                         than function 0 */, dsm_mem_addr);
>
> The return type is void so "return foo()" looks strange.  I went back
> and double-checked function prototypes because I was surprised by this
> line of code.  Please use the conventional "foo(); return;" for void
> return instead.
>

I am so lazy to omit this single line. :)

Okay, will follow this style in the next version.