From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from wolverine02.qualcomm.com ([199.106.114.251]:44946 "EHLO wolverine02.qualcomm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755653Ab0KPUpa (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Nov 2010 15:45:30 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/14] msm: iommu: Miscellaneous code cleanup From: Daniel Walker In-Reply-To: <4CE1DB7F.1020408@codeaurora.org> References: <1289619000-13167-1-git-send-email-stepanm@codeaurora.org> <1289619000-13167-15-git-send-email-stepanm@codeaurora.org> <1289867105.4050.29.camel@c-dwalke-linux.qualcomm.com> <4CE1DB7F.1020408@codeaurora.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 12:45:23 -0800 Message-ID: <1289940323.9950.15.camel@c-dwalke-linux.qualcomm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-arm-msm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Stepan Moskovchenko Cc: davidb@codeaurora.org, bryanh@codeaurora.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2010-11-15 at 17:16 -0800, Stepan Moskovchenko wrote: > On 11/15/2010 4:25 PM, Daniel Walker wrote: > > On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 19:30 -0800, Stepan Moskovchenko wrote: > >> Remove some unneeded assignments and messages, restructure > >> a failure path in iova_to_phys, and make __flush_iotlb > >> return int in preparation for adding IOMMU clock control. > > Why restructure the failure path ? > > > > Daniel > > It is a trivial change of replacing a goto with an assignment and moving > it a few lines down. It reduces "jumpiness" within that function and is > a cleaner version. On the more practical side, it was done in > preparation for some other changes I have coming up, which touch that > function and work a lot better with the cleaned-up failure path. The > next patch was delayed (due to a dependency) but as long as I was doing > code cleanup, I saw no reason not to also clean up the failure path as > part of this series. Some of what your have said above really needs to be in your commit text. I've noticed that your commit text in general is not verbose enough. You need to explain what doing better. Also generally you want to organize similar sets of changes. So if you doing a cleanup in preparation for another change then the cleanup should go with the other change. In this case it's not clear that this is actually a cleanup, so it would be much nicer to get that change along with the one you've delayed .. Also the two Kconfig changes you've sent indicate that your not organizing your changes properly, so I think you need to take more time considering how to the organize patches. Just so we're clear on this, any changes that you send me will go into _permanent_ public history. This history will not disappear at some set date, and we will not be rebasing out changes or squashing changes. Daniel -- Sent by a consultant of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: dwalker@codeaurora.org (Daniel Walker) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 12:45:23 -0800 Subject: [PATCH 14/14] msm: iommu: Miscellaneous code cleanup In-Reply-To: <4CE1DB7F.1020408@codeaurora.org> References: <1289619000-13167-1-git-send-email-stepanm@codeaurora.org> <1289619000-13167-15-git-send-email-stepanm@codeaurora.org> <1289867105.4050.29.camel@c-dwalke-linux.qualcomm.com> <4CE1DB7F.1020408@codeaurora.org> Message-ID: <1289940323.9950.15.camel@c-dwalke-linux.qualcomm.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Mon, 2010-11-15 at 17:16 -0800, Stepan Moskovchenko wrote: > On 11/15/2010 4:25 PM, Daniel Walker wrote: > > On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 19:30 -0800, Stepan Moskovchenko wrote: > >> Remove some unneeded assignments and messages, restructure > >> a failure path in iova_to_phys, and make __flush_iotlb > >> return int in preparation for adding IOMMU clock control. > > Why restructure the failure path ? > > > > Daniel > > It is a trivial change of replacing a goto with an assignment and moving > it a few lines down. It reduces "jumpiness" within that function and is > a cleaner version. On the more practical side, it was done in > preparation for some other changes I have coming up, which touch that > function and work a lot better with the cleaned-up failure path. The > next patch was delayed (due to a dependency) but as long as I was doing > code cleanup, I saw no reason not to also clean up the failure path as > part of this series. Some of what your have said above really needs to be in your commit text. I've noticed that your commit text in general is not verbose enough. You need to explain what doing better. Also generally you want to organize similar sets of changes. So if you doing a cleanup in preparation for another change then the cleanup should go with the other change. In this case it's not clear that this is actually a cleanup, so it would be much nicer to get that change along with the one you've delayed .. Also the two Kconfig changes you've sent indicate that your not organizing your changes properly, so I think you need to take more time considering how to the organize patches. Just so we're clear on this, any changes that you send me will go into _permanent_ public history. This history will not disappear at some set date, and we will not be rebasing out changes or squashing changes. Daniel -- Sent by a consultant of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.