All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alex Dewar <alex.dewar90@gmail.com>
To: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@nvidia.com>
Cc: "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
	"ath10k@lists.infradead.org" <ath10k@lists.infradead.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"kvalo@codeaurora.org" <kvalo@codeaurora.org>,
	"davem@davemloft.net" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	"kuba@kernel.org" <kuba@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ath10k: sdio: remove reduntant check in for loop
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2020 17:59:11 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <57efff54-7aa4-8220-c705-1fdf35b0099e@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c2987351e3bdad16510dd35847991c2412a9db6b.camel@nvidia.com>

[snip]
> 'i' is only referenced once inside the loop to check boundary,
>
> the loop is actually iterating over cur_section, so i would make it
> clear in the loop statement, e.g.:
> Remove the break condition and the cur_section assignment at the end of
> the loop and use the loop statement to do it for you
>
> for (; cur_section; cur_section = next_section)
>
>
>>   		section_size = cur_section->end - cur_section->start;
>>   
>>   		if (section_size <= 0) {
>> @@ -2318,7 +2318,7 @@ static int
>> ath10k_sdio_dump_memory_section(struct ath10k *ar,
>>   			break;
>>   		}
>>   
>> -		if ((i + 1) == mem_region->section_table.size) {
> And for i you can just increment it inline:
> if (++i == ...)

Good suggestions! I've sent a v2 with these changes.

>      
>
>> +		if (i == mem_region->section_table.size) {
>>   			/* last section */
>>   			next_section = NULL;
>>   			skip_size = 0;


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Alex Dewar <alex.dewar90@gmail.com>
To: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@nvidia.com>
Cc: "netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"ath10k@lists.infradead.org" <ath10k@lists.infradead.org>,
	"kuba@kernel.org" <kuba@kernel.org>,
	"davem@davemloft.net" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	"kvalo@codeaurora.org" <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ath10k: sdio: remove reduntant check in for loop
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2020 17:59:11 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <57efff54-7aa4-8220-c705-1fdf35b0099e@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c2987351e3bdad16510dd35847991c2412a9db6b.camel@nvidia.com>

[snip]
> 'i' is only referenced once inside the loop to check boundary,
>
> the loop is actually iterating over cur_section, so i would make it
> clear in the loop statement, e.g.:
> Remove the break condition and the cur_section assignment at the end of
> the loop and use the loop statement to do it for you
>
> for (; cur_section; cur_section = next_section)
>
>
>>   		section_size = cur_section->end - cur_section->start;
>>   
>>   		if (section_size <= 0) {
>> @@ -2318,7 +2318,7 @@ static int
>> ath10k_sdio_dump_memory_section(struct ath10k *ar,
>>   			break;
>>   		}
>>   
>> -		if ((i + 1) == mem_region->section_table.size) {
> And for i you can just increment it inline:
> if (++i == ...)

Good suggestions! I've sent a v2 with these changes.

>      
>
>> +		if (i == mem_region->section_table.size) {
>>   			/* last section */
>>   			next_section = NULL;
>>   			skip_size = 0;


_______________________________________________
ath10k mailing list
ath10k@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k

  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-09-16 20:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-09-14 19:19 [PATCH] ath10k: sdio: remove reduntant check in for loop Alex Dewar
2020-09-14 19:19 ` Alex Dewar
2020-09-14 21:51 ` Saeed Mahameed
2020-09-14 21:51   ` Saeed Mahameed
2020-09-16 16:57   ` [PATCH v2] ath10k: sdio: remove redundant " Alex Dewar
2020-09-16 16:57     ` Alex Dewar
2020-09-17  0:45     ` Julian Calaby
2020-09-17  0:45       ` Julian Calaby
2020-09-24 16:27       ` Kalle Valo
2020-09-24 16:27         ` Kalle Valo
2020-09-27 10:58         ` Alex Dewar
2020-09-27 10:58           ` Alex Dewar
2020-09-29  7:42           ` Kalle Valo
2020-09-29  7:42             ` Kalle Valo
2020-11-06  6:36     ` Kalle Valo
2020-11-06  6:36     ` Kalle Valo
2020-09-16 16:59   ` Alex Dewar [this message]
2020-09-16 16:59     ` [PATCH] ath10k: sdio: remove reduntant " Alex Dewar

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=57efff54-7aa4-8220-c705-1fdf35b0099e@gmail.com \
    --to=alex.dewar90@gmail.com \
    --cc=ath10k@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=kvalo@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=saeedm@nvidia.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.