From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49781)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <peter.maydell@linaro.org>) id 1aX5iw-0003Sv-Vj
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 20 Feb 2016 06:29:19 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <peter.maydell@linaro.org>) id 1aX5iw-00070M-3U
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 20 Feb 2016 06:29:18 -0500
Received: from mail-vk0-x231.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400c:c05::231]:36630)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <peter.maydell@linaro.org>) id 1aX5iv-0006zj-KA
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 20 Feb 2016 06:29:18 -0500
Received: by mail-vk0-x231.google.com with SMTP id c3so95642406vkb.3
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Sat, 20 Feb 2016 03:29:17 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAKmqyKNy79b8_k2wOO_v0DgXc3OCwhcHv7zVkcEPe_Fft6-Gpw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1455892784-11328-1-git-send-email-peter.maydell@linaro.org>
	<1455892784-11328-3-git-send-email-peter.maydell@linaro.org>
	<CAKmqyKNy79b8_k2wOO_v0DgXc3OCwhcHv7zVkcEPe_Fft6-Gpw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2016 11:28:57 +0000
Message-ID: <CAFEAcA8_oJZU_mHBbmSk0XvJPaevAri6A-UwBkMHCBh2op9h+A@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 2/2] target-arm: Implement MDCR_EL3.TPM
 and MDCR_EL2.TPM traps
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Alistair Francis <alistair23@gmail.com>
Cc: "Edgar E. Iglesias" <edgar.iglesias@gmail.com>, qemu-arm <qemu-arm@nongnu.org>, "qemu-devel@nongnu.org Developers" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, Patch Tracking <patches@linaro.org>, Sergey Fedorov <serge.fdrv@gmail.com>

On 19 February 2016 at 19:38, Alistair Francis <alistair23@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 6:39 AM, Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> wrote:
>> +/* Check for traps to performance monitor registers, which are controlled
>> + * by MDCR_EL2.TPM for EL2 and MDCR_EL3.TPM for EL3.
>> + */
>> +static CPAccessResult access_tpm(CPUARMState *env, const ARMCPRegInfo *ri,
>> +                                 bool isread)
>> +{
>> +    int el = arm_current_el(env);
>> +
>> +    if (el < 2 && (env->cp15.mdcr_el2 & MDCR_TPM)
>> +        && !arm_is_secure_below_el3(env)) {
>> +        return CP_ACCESS_TRAP_EL2;
>> +    }
>> +    if (el < 3 && (env->cp15.mdcr_el3 & MDCR_TPM)) {
>> +        return CP_ACCESS_TRAP_EL3;
>> +    }
>
> Hey Peter,
>
> Why not use else if?

I generally tend not to use else-if ladders if the thing
in the conditional returns unconditionally, just as a
personal style preference. "if () { X } else if () { Y } Z"
implies a possible control flow path of "take the if
branch so run X, then skip Y, and continue after to run Z",
and if X returns unconditionally that can't happen.
It also matches up with the usual approach of
   if (something) {
       early return;
   }
   main body of function;

which you wouldn't want to write as
   if (something) {
      early return;
   } else {
      main body;
   }

thanks
-- PMM