Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] irqchip/tegra: Clean up coding style

[Marc Zyngier]

On Sun, 11 Aug 2019 19:30:44 +0100,
Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> Make coding style to conform to the kernel's standard by fixing checkpatch
> warnings about "line over 80 characters".

The last time I used a VT100 was about 30 years ago. I still think
this was one of the most brilliant piece of equipment DEC ever
produced, but I replaced it at the time with a Wyse 50 that had a 132
column mode. But even then, I could make my XTerm as wide as I wanted,
and things haven't regressed much since.

More seriously, I don't consider the 80 column limit a hard one, and
I'm pretty happy with code that spans more that 80 columns if that
allows to read an expression without messing with the flow.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  drivers/irqchip/irq-tegra.c | 15 +++++----------
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-tegra.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-tegra.c
> index 14dcacc2ad38..f829a5990dae 100644
> --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-tegra.c
> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-tegra.c
> @@ -74,7 +74,7 @@ static struct tegra_ictlr_info *lic;
>  
>  static inline void tegra_ictlr_write_mask(struct irq_data *d, unsigned long reg)
>  {
> -	void __iomem *base = (void __iomem __force *)d->chip_data;
> +	void __iomem *base = lic->base[d->hwirq / 32];

(1) This is an undocumented change

(2) Why do you think that moving from a per-interrupt base that is
    known at setup time to something that has to be recomputed on each
    and every access is a good thing?

Thanks,

	M.

>  	u32 mask;
>  
>  	mask = BIT(d->hwirq % 32);
> @@ -142,7 +142,8 @@ static int tegra_ictlr_suspend(void)
>  		writel_relaxed(~0ul, ictlr + ICTLR_CPU_IER_CLR);
>  
>  		/* Enable the wakeup sources of ictlr */
> -		writel_relaxed(lic->ictlr_wake_mask[i], ictlr + ICTLR_CPU_IER_SET);
> +		writel_relaxed(lic->ictlr_wake_mask[i],
> +			       ictlr + ICTLR_CPU_IER_SET);
>  	}
>  	local_irq_restore(flags);
>  
> @@ -222,7 +223,6 @@ static int tegra_ictlr_domain_alloc(struct irq_domain *domain,
>  {
>  	struct irq_fwspec *fwspec = data;
>  	struct irq_fwspec parent_fwspec;
> -	struct tegra_ictlr_info *info = domain->host_data;
>  	irq_hw_number_t hwirq;
>  	unsigned int i;
>  
> @@ -235,13 +235,9 @@ static int tegra_ictlr_domain_alloc(struct irq_domain *domain,
>  	if (hwirq >= (num_ictlrs * 32))
>  		return -EINVAL;
>  
> -	for (i = 0; i < nr_irqs; i++) {
> -		int ictlr = (hwirq + i) / 32;
> -
> +	for (i = 0; i < nr_irqs; i++)
>  		irq_domain_set_hwirq_and_chip(domain, virq + i, hwirq + i,
> -					      &tegra_ictlr_chip,
> -					      (void __force *)info->base[ictlr]);
> -	}
> +					      &tegra_ictlr_chip, NULL);
>  
>  	parent_fwspec = *fwspec;
>  	parent_fwspec.fwnode = domain->parent->fwnode;
> @@ -312,7 +308,6 @@ static int __init tegra_ictlr_init(struct device_node *node,
>  	     "%pOF: Found %u interrupt controllers in DT; expected %u.\n",
>  	     node, num_ictlrs, soc->num_ictlrs);
>  
> -
>  	domain = irq_domain_add_hierarchy(parent_domain, 0, num_ictlrs * 32,
>  					  node, &tegra_ictlr_domain_ops,
>  					  lic);
> -- 
> 2.22.0
> 

-- 
Jazz is not dead, it just smells funny.