Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] tty: serial: introduce transmit helper generators

From: Greg KH
Date: Thu Sep 01 2022 - 08:25:25 EST


On Thu, Sep 01, 2022 at 01:06:55PM +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> Many serial drivers do the same thing:
> * send x_char if set
> * keep sending from the xmit circular buffer until either
> - the loop reaches the end of the xmit buffer
> - TX is stopped
> - HW fifo is full
> * check for pending characters and:
> - wake up tty writers to fill for more data into xmit buffer
> - stop TX if there is nothing in the xmit buffer
>
> The only differences are:
> * how to write the character to the HW fifo
> * the check of the end condition:
> - is the HW fifo full?
> - is limit of the written characters reached?
>
> So unify the above into two helper generators:
> * DEFINE_UART_PORT_TX_HELPER_LIMITED() -- it performs the above taking
> the written characters limit into account, and
> * DEFINE_UART_PORT_TX_HELPER() -- the same as above, except it only
> checks the HW readiness, not the characters limit.
>
> The HW specific operations (as stated as "differences" above) are passed
> as arguments to the macros. They are:
> * tx_ready() -- returns true if HW can accept more data.
> * put_char() -- write a character to the device.
> * tx_done() -- when the write loop is done, perform arbitrary action
> before potential invocation of ops->stop_tx() happens.
>
> Note that the above macros are generators. This means the code is
> generated in place and the above 3 arguments are "inlined". I.e. no
> added penalty by generating call instructions for every single
> character. Nor any indirect calls. (As in previous versions of this
> patchset.)
>
> Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@xxxxxxx>
> ---
>
> Notes:
> [v2] instead of a function (uart_port_tx_limit()) in serial_core,
> generate these in-place using macros. Thus eliminating "call"
> penalty.

Much nicer, but:

> +#define __DEFINE_UART_PORT_TX_HELPER(name, port, ch, tx_ready, put_char, \
> + tx_done, for_test, for_post, ...) \

Do you really need "port" and "ch" as part of this macro? You always
set that to the same thing in your patches, so is it really needed?

thanks,

greg k-h