From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758004AbcIHNLx (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Sep 2016 09:11:53 -0400 Received: from mx07-00178001.pphosted.com ([62.209.51.94]:27120 "EHLO mx07-00178001.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757483AbcIHNLv (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Sep 2016 09:11:51 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 12/19] remoteproc: core: Add vdev support and force mode to resource amending function To: Lee Jones References: <1472676622-32533-1-git-send-email-loic.pallardy@st.com> <1472676622-32533-13-git-send-email-loic.pallardy@st.com> <20160908084805.GL4921@dell> <45e0d198-b913-ee2c-df00-b1ba8e1a179a@st.com> <20160908110209.GQ4921@dell> CC: , , , , From: loic pallardy Message-ID: Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2016 15:11:42 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160908110209.GQ4921@dell> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.201.23.23] X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:,, definitions=2016-09-08_07:,, signatures=0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 09/08/2016 01:02 PM, Lee Jones wrote: > On Thu, 08 Sep 2016, loic pallardy wrote: > >> >> >> On 09/08/2016 10:48 AM, Lee Jones wrote: >>> On Wed, 31 Aug 2016, Loic Pallardy wrote: >>> >>>> This patch proposes diverse updates to rproc_update_resource_table_entry >>>> function: >>>> - rename rproc_update_resource_table_entry to __update_rsc_tbl_entry to >>>> have shorter function name. >>>> - add RSC_VDEV support >>>> - add force mode resource even if resource already fixed on firmware side. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Loic Pallardy >>>> --- >>>> drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++++----- >>>> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c >>>> index 30e9c70..aff1a00 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c >>>> @@ -1027,13 +1027,15 @@ static int __verify_rsc_tbl_entry(struct rproc *rproc, >>>> return -EINVAL; >>>> } >>>> >>>> -static int rproc_update_resource_table_entry(struct rproc *rproc, >>>> +static int __update_rsc_tbl_entry(struct rproc *rproc, >>> >>> Unless the name is unruly, (which I don't think it is, you're still >>> having to line wrap at the call site), I tend to go for clarity over >>> brevity. >> It was only to have reasonable line length. I can keept original name and >> see impact on rest of the code. > > Reasonable line length is 80. This line was 65. This line yes. Name change proposal is to reduce line where this function is called (in rproc_apply_resource_overrides for exemple) But OK to keep standard rproc_xxx naming >