Re: [PATCH v2 06/14] dmaengine: ti: Add cppi5 header for UDMA

[Grygorii Strashko]

On 09/09/2019 13:59, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
> On 08/09/2019 17.25, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > On 30-07-19, 12:34, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
> >
> > > +/**
> > > + * Descriptor header, present in all types of descriptors
> > > + */
> > > +struct cppi5_desc_hdr_t {
> > > +	u32 pkt_info0;	/* Packet info word 0 (n/a in Buffer desc) */
> > > +	u32 pkt_info1;	/* Packet info word 1 (n/a in Buffer desc) */
> > > +	u32 pkt_info2;	/* Packet info word 2 Buffer reclamation info */
> > > +	u32 src_dst_tag; /* Packet info word 3 (n/a in Buffer desc) */
> >
> > Can we move these comments to kernel-doc style please
>
> Sure, I'll move all struct and enums.
>
> > > +/**
> > > + * cppi5_desc_get_type - get descriptor type
> > > + * @desc_hdr: packet descriptor/TR header
> > > + *
> > > + * Returns descriptor type:
> > > + * CPPI5_INFO0_DESC_TYPE_VAL_HOST
> > > + * CPPI5_INFO0_DESC_TYPE_VAL_MONO
> > > + * CPPI5_INFO0_DESC_TYPE_VAL_TR
> > > + */
> > > +static inline u32 cppi5_desc_get_type(struct cppi5_desc_hdr_t *desc_hdr)
> > > +{
> > > +	WARN_ON(!desc_hdr);
> >
> > why WARN_ON and not return error!
>
> these helpers were intended to be as simple as possible.
> I can go through with all of the WARN_ONs and replace them with if()
> pr_warn() and either just return or return with 0.
>
> Would that be acceptable?

This should never happens in working system unless there is buggy code.
I think It can be just removed

--
Best regards,
grygorii