From: Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com>
To: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>,
Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>,
<linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Alex Elder <elder@linaro.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>,
Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@wizery.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/7] remoteproc: Restructure firmware name allocation
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2020 08:39:39 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e887c990-8cba-62b0-0f47-3ea0c166d603@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aa565fea-b1c4-9b5c-73ed-591244afee19@web.de>
Hi Markus,
On 4/16/20 1:26 AM, Markus Elfring wrote:
> …
>> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
>> @@ -1984,14 +1984,14 @@ static int rproc_alloc_firmware(struct rproc *rproc,
>> {
>> const char *p;
>>
>> - if (!firmware)
>> + if (firmware)
>> + p = kstrdup_const(firmware, GFP_KERNEL);
>> + else
>> /*
>> * If the caller didn't pass in a firmware name then
>> * construct a default name.
>> */
>> p = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "rproc-%s-fw", name);
>> - else
>> - p = kstrdup_const(firmware, GFP_KERNEL);
>
> Can the use of the conditional operator make sense at such source code places?
>
> p = firmware ? kstrdup_const(…) : kasprintf(…);
For simple assignments, I too prefer the ternary operator, but in this
case, I think it is better to leave the current code as is.
regards
Suman
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-04-17 13:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-04-15 20:48 [PATCH v2 0/7] remoteproc: Refactor function rproc_alloc() Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-15 20:48 ` [PATCH v2 1/7] remoteproc: Fix IDR initialisation in rproc_alloc() Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-17 13:37 ` Suman Anna
2020-04-20 5:00 ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-04-15 20:48 ` [PATCH v2 2/7] remoteproc: Split firmware name allocation from rproc_alloc() Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-15 21:28 ` Alex Elder
2020-04-20 5:09 ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-04-20 9:24 ` Arnaud POULIQUEN
2020-04-20 21:29 ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-15 20:48 ` [PATCH v2 3/7] remoteproc: Simplify default name allocation Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-15 21:26 ` Alex Elder
2020-04-20 5:10 ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-04-15 20:48 ` [PATCH v2 4/7] remoteproc: Use kstrdup_const() rather than kstrup() Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-15 21:25 ` Alex Elder
2020-04-17 13:44 ` Suman Anna
2020-04-20 5:21 ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-04-17 16:12 ` [v2 4/7] remoteproc: Use kstrdup_const() rather than kstrdup() Markus Elfring
2020-04-15 20:48 ` [PATCH v2 5/7] remoteproc: Restructure firmware name allocation Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-15 21:23 ` Alex Elder
2020-04-20 5:17 ` Bjorn Andersson
2020-04-16 6:26 ` Markus Elfring
2020-04-17 13:39 ` Suman Anna [this message]
2020-04-17 15:48 ` [v2 " Markus Elfring
2020-04-17 16:15 ` Suman Anna
2020-04-17 20:58 ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-17 21:28 ` [PATCH v2 " Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-15 20:48 ` [PATCH v2 6/7] remoteproc: Split rproc_ops allocation from rproc_alloc() Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-17 13:49 ` Suman Anna
2020-04-17 15:35 ` Suman Anna
2020-04-17 21:56 ` Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-15 20:48 ` [PATCH v2 7/7] remoteproc: Get rid of tedious error path Mathieu Poirier
2020-04-17 13:50 ` Suman Anna
2020-04-17 13:34 ` [PATCH v2 0/7] remoteproc: Refactor function rproc_alloc() Suman Anna
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=e887c990-8cba-62b0-0f47-3ea0c166d603@ti.com \
--to=s-anna@ti.com \
--cc=Markus.Elfring@web.de \
--cc=bjorn.andersson@linaro.org \
--cc=elder@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.poirier@linaro.org \
--cc=ohad@wizery.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).