Re: [PATCH v3 05/10] drivers: qcom: rpmh-rsc: write sleep/wake requests to TCS

[Lina Iyer]

On Thu, Mar 08 2018 at 16:58 -0700, Lina Iyer wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 08 2018 at 12:41 -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > Quoting Lina Iyer (2018-03-02 08:43:12)

> > > +static int find_slots(struct tcs_group *tcs, struct tcs_request *msg,
> > > +                    int *m, int *n)
> > > +{
> > > +       int slot, offset;
> > > +       int i = 0;
> > > +
> > > +       /* Find if we already have the msg in our TCS */
> > > +       slot = find_match(tcs, msg->payload, msg->num_payload);
> > > +       if (slot >= 0)
> > > +               goto copy_data;
> >
> > Shouldn't this goto skip setting the bits in tcs->slots?
> No, we overwrite what we found with this new data.
> > > +
> > > +       /* Do over, until we can fit the full payload in a TCS */
> > > +       do {
> > > +               slot = bitmap_find_next_zero_area(tcs->slots, MAX_TCS_SLOTS,
> > > +                                                i, msg->num_payload, 0);
> > > +               if (slot == MAX_TCS_SLOTS)
> > > +                       break;
> > > +               i += tcs->ncpt;
> > > +       } while (slot + msg->num_payload - 1 >= i);
> > > +
> > > +       if (slot == MAX_TCS_SLOTS)
> > > +               return -ENOMEM;
> >
> > Would be nice to remove this duplicate condition somehow. Maybe a goto?
> I would return instead of the break earlier instead of this here.
> > > +
> > > +copy_data:
> > > +       bitmap_set(tcs->slots, slot, msg->num_payload);
> > > +       /* Copy the addresses of the resources over to the slots */
> > > +       if (tcs->cmd_addr) {
> >
> > find_match() above didn't check for tcs->cmd_addr. Does this ever happen
> > to fail?
> Not allocated for active TCSes. I should be checking for it there as
> well. Not sure how I didnt see a failure.
Ah, this function is never called for active tcs which would have the
tcs->cmd_addr to be NULL. I dont need this check.

-- Lina