Re: [PATCH v2 01/10] boot-mode-reg: Add core

From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
To: Dirk Behme <dirk.behme@de.bosch.com>
Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>,
	Simon Horman <horms+renesas@verge.net.au>,
	linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org,
	Dirk Behme <dirk.behme@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 01/10] boot-mode-reg: Add core
Date: Wed, 11 May 2016 10:41:32 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAMuHMdUREdcanmHgp2Q6tq53-G28Eh-mvxX+GK-t6RDeXZLCOw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <40fe97f4-43e4-6a4a-6c26-d76d6f44138f@de.bosch.com>

Hi Dirk,

On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 10:39 AM, Dirk Behme <dirk.behme@de.bosch.com> wrote:
> On 11.05.2016 09:54, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 7:29 AM, Dirk Behme <dirk.behme@de.bosch.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/drivers/misc/boot-mode-reg/core.c
>>
>>> +/**
>>> + * boot_mode_reg_set() - record boot mode register value
>>> + * @mode: implementation-dependent boot mode register value
>>> + *
>>> + * Records the boot mode register value which may subsequently
>>> + * be retrieved using boot_mode_reg_get().
>>> + *
>>> + * return: 0 on success
>>> + */
>>> +int boot_mode_reg_set(u32 mode)
>>> +{
>>> +       int err = -EBUSY;
>>> +
>>> +       mutex_lock(&boot_mode_mutex);
>>> +       if (!boot_mode_is_set) {
>>
>> You've dropped the check for calling this function a subsequent time with
>> a different value of mode?
>
> Sometimes inverting 'complex' if statements is not that easy ;)
>
> You mean
>
> if (!boot_mode_is_set || boot_mode != mode)

No, De Morgan says

        if (!boot_mode_is_set || boot_mode == mode)

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds