On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 09:12:49PM +0800, Hans Zhang wrote:
On 2025/1/24 00:16, Frank Li wrote:
Hi Frank,+static char *dw_ltssm_sts_string(enum dw_pcie_ltssm ltssm)
+{
+ char *str;
+
+ switch (ltssm) {
+#define DW_PCIE_LTSSM_NAME(n) case n: str = #n; break
+ DW_PCIE_LTSSM_NAME(DW_PCIE_LTSSM_DETECT_QUIET);
+ DW_PCIE_LTSSM_NAME(DW_PCIE_LTSSM_DETECT_ACT);
+ DW_PCIE_LTSSM_NAME(DW_PCIE_LTSSM_POLL_ACTIVE);
+ DW_PCIE_LTSSM_NAME(DW_PCIE_LTSSM_POLL_COMPLIANCE);
+ ...
+ default:
+ str = "DW_PCIE_LTSSM_UNKNOWN";
+ break;
I prefer
const char * str[] =
{
"detect_quitet",
"detect_act",
...
}
return str[ltssm];
Or
#define DW_PCIE_LTSSM_NAME(n) case n: return #n;
...
default:
return "DW_PCIE_LTSSM_UNKNOWN";
I considered the two methods you mentioned before I submitted this patch.
The first, I think, will increase the memory overhead.
+static const char * const dw_pcie_ltssm_str[] = {
+ [DW_PCIE_LTSSM_DETECT_QUIET] = "DETECT_QUIET",
+ [DW_PCIE_LTSSM_DETECT_ACT] = "DETECT_ACT",
+ [DW_PCIE_LTSSM_POLL_ACTIVE] = "POLL_ACTIVE",
+ [DW_PCIE_LTSSM_POLL_COMPLIANCE] = "POLL_COMPLIANCE",
...
The second, ./scripts/checkpatch.pl checks will have a warning
WARNING: Macros with flow control statements should be avoided
#121: FILE: drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.h:329:
+#define DW_PCIE_LTSSM_NAME(n) case n: return #n
Okay, it is not big deal
can you return
str + strlen("DW_PCIE_LTSSM_");
Or trim useless "DW_PCIE_LTSSM_" information.