2024-04-05 19:01:19

by Andy Shevchenko

Subject: [PATCH, resend v1 1/1] irqdomain: Check virq for 0 before use in irq_dispose_mapping()

It's a bit hard to read the logic since we use virq before checking
it for 0. Rearrange the code to make it better to understand.

This, in particular, should clearly answer the question whether caller
need to perform this check or not, and we have plenty places for both
variants, confirming a confusion.

Fun fact that the new code is shorter:

Function old new delta
irq_dispose_mapping 278 271 -7
Total: Before=11625, After=11618, chg -0.06%

when compiled by GCC on Debian for x86_64.

Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]>
---
kernel/irq/irqdomain.c | 5 +++--
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/irq/irqdomain.c b/kernel/irq/irqdomain.c
index 3dd1c871e091..aadc8891cc16 100644
--- a/kernel/irq/irqdomain.c
+++ b/kernel/irq/irqdomain.c
@@ -909,10 +909,11 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(irq_create_of_mapping);
*/
void irq_dispose_mapping(unsigned int virq)
{
- struct irq_data *irq_data = irq_get_irq_data(virq);
+ struct irq_data *irq_data;
struct irq_domain *domain;

- if (!virq || !irq_data)
+ irq_data = virq ? irq_get_irq_data(virq) : NULL;
+ if (!irq_data)
return;

domain = irq_data->domain;
--
2.43.0.rc1.1.gbec44491f096

2024-04-08 10:18:11

by tip-bot2 for Alexey Makhalov

Subject: [tip: irq/core] irqdomain: Check virq for 0 before use in irq_dispose_mapping()

The following commit has been merged into the irq/core branch of tip:

Commit-ID: a2ea3cd78317ae8995b65b52299158bbae52a77f
Gitweb: https://git.kernel.org/tip/a2ea3cd78317ae8995b65b52299158bbae52a77f
Author: Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]>
AuthorDate: Fri, 05 Apr 2024 22:01:05 +03:00
Committer: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
CommitterDate: Mon, 08 Apr 2024 12:08:58 +02:00

irqdomain: Check virq for 0 before use in irq_dispose_mapping()

It's a bit hard to read the logic since the virq is used before checking it
for 0. Rearrange the code to make it better to understand.

This, in particular, should clearly answer the question whether the caller
needs to perform this check or not, and there are plenty of places for both
variants, confirming a confusion.

Fun fact that the new code is shorter:

Function old new delta
irq_dispose_mapping 278 271 -7
Total: Before=11625, After=11618, chg -0.06%

when compiled by GCC on Debian for x86_64.

Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]

---
kernel/irq/irqdomain.c | 5 +++--
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/irq/irqdomain.c b/kernel/irq/irqdomain.c
index 3dd1c87..aadc889 100644
--- a/kernel/irq/irqdomain.c
+++ b/kernel/irq/irqdomain.c
@@ -909,10 +909,11 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(irq_create_of_mapping);
*/
void irq_dispose_mapping(unsigned int virq)
{
- struct irq_data *irq_data = irq_get_irq_data(virq);
+ struct irq_data *irq_data;
struct irq_domain *domain;

- if (!virq || !irq_data)
+ irq_data = virq ? irq_get_irq_data(virq) : NULL;
+ if (!irq_data)
return;

domain = irq_data->domain;