Change conditional compilation to IS_ENABLED macro,
and simplify if else statement to return statement.
No functional change.
Signed-off-by: Keoseong Park <[email protected]>
---
drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h | 17 ++++++++---------
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h
index c98d540ac044..6d239a855753 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h
+++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h
@@ -893,16 +893,15 @@ static inline bool ufshcd_is_rpm_autosuspend_allowed(struct ufs_hba *hba)
static inline bool ufshcd_is_intr_aggr_allowed(struct ufs_hba *hba)
{
-/* DWC UFS Core has the Interrupt aggregation feature but is not detectable*/
-#ifndef CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_DWC
- if ((hba->caps & UFSHCD_CAP_INTR_AGGR) &&
- !(hba->quirks & UFSHCD_QUIRK_BROKEN_INTR_AGGR))
+ /*
+ * DWC UFS Core has the Interrupt aggregation feature
+ * but is not detectable.
+ */
+ if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_DWC))
return true;
- else
- return false;
-#else
-return true;
-#endif
+
+ return (hba->caps & UFSHCD_CAP_INTR_AGGR) &&
+ !(hba->quirks & UFSHCD_QUIRK_BROKEN_INTR_AGGR);
}
static inline bool ufshcd_can_aggressive_pc(struct ufs_hba *hba)
--
2.17.1
On 21/06/21 11:51 am, Keoseong Park wrote:
> Change conditional compilation to IS_ENABLED macro,
> and simplify if else statement to return statement.
> No functional change.
>
> Signed-off-by: Keoseong Park <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h | 17 ++++++++---------
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h
> index c98d540ac044..6d239a855753 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h
> @@ -893,16 +893,15 @@ static inline bool ufshcd_is_rpm_autosuspend_allowed(struct ufs_hba *hba)
>
> static inline bool ufshcd_is_intr_aggr_allowed(struct ufs_hba *hba)
> {
> -/* DWC UFS Core has the Interrupt aggregation feature but is not detectable*/
> -#ifndef CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_DWC
> - if ((hba->caps & UFSHCD_CAP_INTR_AGGR) &&
> - !(hba->quirks & UFSHCD_QUIRK_BROKEN_INTR_AGGR))
> + /*
> + * DWC UFS Core has the Interrupt aggregation feature
> + * but is not detectable.
> + */
> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_DWC))
Why is this needed? It seems like you could just set UFSHCD_CAP_INTR_AGGR
and clear UFSHCD_QUIRK_BROKEN_INTR_AGGR instead?
> return true;
> - else
> - return false;
> -#else
> -return true;
> -#endif
> +
> + return (hba->caps & UFSHCD_CAP_INTR_AGGR) &&
> + !(hba->quirks & UFSHCD_QUIRK_BROKEN_INTR_AGGR);
> }
>
> static inline bool ufshcd_can_aggressive_pc(struct ufs_hba *hba)
>
>On 21/06/21 11:51 am, Keoseong Park wrote:
>> Change conditional compilation to IS_ENABLED macro,
>> and simplify if else statement to return statement.
>> No functional change.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Keoseong Park <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h | 17 ++++++++---------
>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h
>> index c98d540ac044..6d239a855753 100644
>> --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h
>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h
>> @@ -893,16 +893,15 @@ static inline bool ufshcd_is_rpm_autosuspend_allowed(struct ufs_hba *hba)
>>
>> static inline bool ufshcd_is_intr_aggr_allowed(struct ufs_hba *hba)
>> {
>> -/* DWC UFS Core has the Interrupt aggregation feature but is not detectable*/
>> -#ifndef CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_DWC
>> - if ((hba->caps & UFSHCD_CAP_INTR_AGGR) &&
>> - !(hba->quirks & UFSHCD_QUIRK_BROKEN_INTR_AGGR))
>> + /*
>> + * DWC UFS Core has the Interrupt aggregation feature
>> + * but is not detectable.
>> + */
>> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_DWC))
>
>Why is this needed? It seems like you could just set UFSHCD_CAP_INTR_AGGR
>and clear UFSHCD_QUIRK_BROKEN_INTR_AGGR instead?
Hello Adrian,
Sorry for late reply.
The code that returns true when CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_DWC is set in the original code
is only changed using the IS_ENABLED macro.
(Linux kernel coding style, 21) Conditional Compilation)
When CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_DWC is not defined, the code for checking quirk
and caps has been moved to the newly added return statement below.
Thanks,
Keoseong
>
>> return true;
>> - else
>> - return false;
>> -#else
>> -return true;
>> -#endif
>> +
>> + return (hba->caps & UFSHCD_CAP_INTR_AGGR) &&
>> + !(hba->quirks & UFSHCD_QUIRK_BROKEN_INTR_AGGR);
>> }
>>
>> static inline bool ufshcd_can_aggressive_pc(struct ufs_hba *hba)
>>
>
On 24/06/21 9:41 am, Keoseong Park wrote:
>> On 21/06/21 11:51 am, Keoseong Park wrote:
>>> Change conditional compilation to IS_ENABLED macro,
>>> and simplify if else statement to return statement.
>>> No functional change.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Keoseong Park <[email protected]>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h | 17 ++++++++---------
>>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h
>>> index c98d540ac044..6d239a855753 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h
>>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h
>>> @@ -893,16 +893,15 @@ static inline bool ufshcd_is_rpm_autosuspend_allowed(struct ufs_hba *hba)
>>>
>>> static inline bool ufshcd_is_intr_aggr_allowed(struct ufs_hba *hba)
>>> {
>>> -/* DWC UFS Core has the Interrupt aggregation feature but is not detectable*/
>>> -#ifndef CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_DWC
>>> - if ((hba->caps & UFSHCD_CAP_INTR_AGGR) &&
>>> - !(hba->quirks & UFSHCD_QUIRK_BROKEN_INTR_AGGR))
>>> + /*
>>> + * DWC UFS Core has the Interrupt aggregation feature
>>> + * but is not detectable.
>>> + */
>>> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_DWC))
>>
>> Why is this needed? It seems like you could just set UFSHCD_CAP_INTR_AGGR
>> and clear UFSHCD_QUIRK_BROKEN_INTR_AGGR instead?
>
> Hello Adrian,
> Sorry for late reply.
>
> The code that returns true when CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_DWC is set in the original code
> is only changed using the IS_ENABLED macro.
> (Linux kernel coding style, 21) Conditional Compilation)
>
> When CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_DWC is not defined, the code for checking quirk
> and caps has been moved to the newly added return statement below.
Looking closer I cannot find CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_DWC at all. It seems like it
never existed.
Why should we not remove the code related to CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_DWC entirely?
>
> Thanks,
> Keoseong
>
>>
>>> return true;
>>> - else
>>> - return false;
>>> -#else
>>> -return true;
>>> -#endif
>>> +
>>> + return (hba->caps & UFSHCD_CAP_INTR_AGGR) &&
>>> + !(hba->quirks & UFSHCD_QUIRK_BROKEN_INTR_AGGR);
>>> }
>>>
>>> static inline bool ufshcd_can_aggressive_pc(struct ufs_hba *hba)
>>>
>>
>On 24/06/21 9:41 am, Keoseong Park wrote:
>>> On 21/06/21 11:51 am, Keoseong Park wrote:
>>>> Change conditional compilation to IS_ENABLED macro,
>>>> and simplify if else statement to return statement.
>>>> No functional change.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Keoseong Park <[email protected]>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h | 17 ++++++++---------
>>>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h
>>>> index c98d540ac044..6d239a855753 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h
>>>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h
>>>> @@ -893,16 +893,15 @@ static inline bool ufshcd_is_rpm_autosuspend_allowed(struct ufs_hba *hba)
>>>>
>>>> static inline bool ufshcd_is_intr_aggr_allowed(struct ufs_hba *hba)
>>>> {
>>>> -/* DWC UFS Core has the Interrupt aggregation feature but is not detectable*/
>>>> -#ifndef CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_DWC
>>>> - if ((hba->caps & UFSHCD_CAP_INTR_AGGR) &&
>>>> - !(hba->quirks & UFSHCD_QUIRK_BROKEN_INTR_AGGR))
>>>> + /*
>>>> + * DWC UFS Core has the Interrupt aggregation feature
>>>> + * but is not detectable.
>>>> + */
>>>> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_DWC))
>>>
>>> Why is this needed? It seems like you could just set UFSHCD_CAP_INTR_AGGR
>>> and clear UFSHCD_QUIRK_BROKEN_INTR_AGGR instead?
>>
>> Hello Adrian,
>> Sorry for late reply.
>>
>> The code that returns true when CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_DWC is set in the original code
>> is only changed using the IS_ENABLED macro.
>> (Linux kernel coding style, 21) Conditional Compilation)
>>
>> When CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_DWC is not defined, the code for checking quirk
>> and caps has been moved to the newly added return statement below.
>
>Looking closer I cannot find CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_DWC at all. It seems like it
>never existed.
>
>Why should we not remove the code related to CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_DWC entirely?
You're right. What do you think of deleting the code related to CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_DWC
and changing it to the patch below?
---
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h
index c98d540ac044..c9faca237290 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h
+++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h
@@ -893,16 +893,8 @@ static inline bool ufshcd_is_rpm_autosuspend_allowed(struct ufs_hba *hba)
static inline bool ufshcd_is_intr_aggr_allowed(struct ufs_hba *hba)
{
-/* DWC UFS Core has the Interrupt aggregation feature but is not detectable*/
-#ifndef CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_DWC
- if ((hba->caps & UFSHCD_CAP_INTR_AGGR) &&
- !(hba->quirks & UFSHCD_QUIRK_BROKEN_INTR_AGGR))
- return true;
- else
- return false;
-#else
-return true;
-#endif
+ return (hba->caps & UFSHCD_CAP_INTR_AGGR) &&
+ !(hba->quirks & UFSHCD_QUIRK_BROKEN_INTR_AGGR);
}
>
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Keoseong
>>
>>>
>>>> return true;
>>>> - else
>>>> - return false;
>>>> -#else
>>>> -return true;
>>>> -#endif
>>>> +
>>>> + return (hba->caps & UFSHCD_CAP_INTR_AGGR) &&
>>>> + !(hba->quirks & UFSHCD_QUIRK_BROKEN_INTR_AGGR);
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> static inline bool ufshcd_can_aggressive_pc(struct ufs_hba *hba)
>>>>
>>>
>
On 24/06/21 1:44 pm, Keoseong Park wrote:
>> On 24/06/21 9:41 am, Keoseong Park wrote:
>>>> On 21/06/21 11:51 am, Keoseong Park wrote:
>>>>> Change conditional compilation to IS_ENABLED macro,
>>>>> and simplify if else statement to return statement.
>>>>> No functional change.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Keoseong Park <[email protected]>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h | 17 ++++++++---------
>>>>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h
>>>>> index c98d540ac044..6d239a855753 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h
>>>>> @@ -893,16 +893,15 @@ static inline bool ufshcd_is_rpm_autosuspend_allowed(struct ufs_hba *hba)
>>>>>
>>>>> static inline bool ufshcd_is_intr_aggr_allowed(struct ufs_hba *hba)
>>>>> {
>>>>> -/* DWC UFS Core has the Interrupt aggregation feature but is not detectable*/
>>>>> -#ifndef CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_DWC
>>>>> - if ((hba->caps & UFSHCD_CAP_INTR_AGGR) &&
>>>>> - !(hba->quirks & UFSHCD_QUIRK_BROKEN_INTR_AGGR))
>>>>> + /*
>>>>> + * DWC UFS Core has the Interrupt aggregation feature
>>>>> + * but is not detectable.
>>>>> + */
>>>>> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_DWC))
>>>>
>>>> Why is this needed? It seems like you could just set UFSHCD_CAP_INTR_AGGR
>>>> and clear UFSHCD_QUIRK_BROKEN_INTR_AGGR instead?
>>>
>>> Hello Adrian,
>>> Sorry for late reply.
>>>
>>> The code that returns true when CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_DWC is set in the original code
>>> is only changed using the IS_ENABLED macro.
>>> (Linux kernel coding style, 21) Conditional Compilation)
>>>
>>> When CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_DWC is not defined, the code for checking quirk
>>> and caps has been moved to the newly added return statement below.
>>
>> Looking closer I cannot find CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_DWC at all. It seems like it
>> never existed.
>>
>> Why should we not remove the code related to CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_DWC entirely?
>
> You're right. What do you think of deleting the code related to CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_DWC
> and changing it to the patch below?
Yes, but cc Joao Pinto <[email protected]> who introduced the code
>
> ---
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h
> index c98d540ac044..c9faca237290 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h
> @@ -893,16 +893,8 @@ static inline bool ufshcd_is_rpm_autosuspend_allowed(struct ufs_hba *hba)
>
> static inline bool ufshcd_is_intr_aggr_allowed(struct ufs_hba *hba)
> {
> -/* DWC UFS Core has the Interrupt aggregation feature but is not detectable*/
> -#ifndef CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_DWC
> - if ((hba->caps & UFSHCD_CAP_INTR_AGGR) &&
> - !(hba->quirks & UFSHCD_QUIRK_BROKEN_INTR_AGGR))
> - return true;
> - else
> - return false;
> -#else
> -return true;
> -#endif
> + return (hba->caps & UFSHCD_CAP_INTR_AGGR) &&
> + !(hba->quirks & UFSHCD_QUIRK_BROKEN_INTR_AGGR);
> }
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Keoseong
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> return true;
>>>>> - else
>>>>> - return false;
>>>>> -#else
>>>>> -return true;
>>>>> -#endif
>>>>> +
>>>>> + return (hba->caps & UFSHCD_CAP_INTR_AGGR) &&
>>>>> + !(hba->quirks & UFSHCD_QUIRK_BROKEN_INTR_AGGR);
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> static inline bool ufshcd_can_aggressive_pc(struct ufs_hba *hba)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>On 24/06/21 1:44 pm, Keoseong Park wrote:
>>> On 24/06/21 9:41 am, Keoseong Park wrote:
>>>>> On 21/06/21 11:51 am, Keoseong Park wrote:
>>>>>> Change conditional compilation to IS_ENABLED macro,
>>>>>> and simplify if else statement to return statement.
>>>>>> No functional change.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Keoseong Park <[email protected]>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h | 17 ++++++++---------
>>>>>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h
>>>>>> index c98d540ac044..6d239a855753 100644
>>>>>> --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h
>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h
>>>>>> @@ -893,16 +893,15 @@ static inline bool ufshcd_is_rpm_autosuspend_allowed(struct ufs_hba *hba)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> static inline bool ufshcd_is_intr_aggr_allowed(struct ufs_hba *hba)
>>>>>> {
>>>>>> -/* DWC UFS Core has the Interrupt aggregation feature but is not detectable*/
>>>>>> -#ifndef CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_DWC
>>>>>> - if ((hba->caps & UFSHCD_CAP_INTR_AGGR) &&
>>>>>> - !(hba->quirks & UFSHCD_QUIRK_BROKEN_INTR_AGGR))
>>>>>> + /*
>>>>>> + * DWC UFS Core has the Interrupt aggregation feature
>>>>>> + * but is not detectable.
>>>>>> + */
>>>>>> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_DWC))
>>>>>
>>>>> Why is this needed? It seems like you could just set UFSHCD_CAP_INTR_AGGR
>>>>> and clear UFSHCD_QUIRK_BROKEN_INTR_AGGR instead?
>>>>
>>>> Hello Adrian,
>>>> Sorry for late reply.
>>>>
>>>> The code that returns true when CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_DWC is set in the original code
>>>> is only changed using the IS_ENABLED macro.
>>>> (Linux kernel coding style, 21) Conditional Compilation)
>>>>
>>>> When CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_DWC is not defined, the code for checking quirk
>>>> and caps has been moved to the newly added return statement below.
>>>
>>> Looking closer I cannot find CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_DWC at all. It seems like it
>>> never existed.
>>>
>>> Why should we not remove the code related to CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_DWC entirely?
>>
>> You're right. What do you think of deleting the code related to CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_DWC
>> and changing it to the patch below?
>
>Yes, but cc Joao Pinto <[email protected]> who introduced the code
Thanks for your advice. I will upload next version patch by adding cc.
Thanks,
Keoseong
>
>>
>> ---
>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h
>> index c98d540ac044..c9faca237290 100644
>> --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h
>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h
>> @@ -893,16 +893,8 @@ static inline bool ufshcd_is_rpm_autosuspend_allowed(struct ufs_hba *hba)
>>
>> static inline bool ufshcd_is_intr_aggr_allowed(struct ufs_hba *hba)
>> {
>> -/* DWC UFS Core has the Interrupt aggregation feature but is not detectable*/
>> -#ifndef CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_DWC
>> - if ((hba->caps & UFSHCD_CAP_INTR_AGGR) &&
>> - !(hba->quirks & UFSHCD_QUIRK_BROKEN_INTR_AGGR))
>> - return true;
>> - else
>> - return false;
>> -#else
>> -return true;
>> -#endif
>> + return (hba->caps & UFSHCD_CAP_INTR_AGGR) &&
>> + !(hba->quirks & UFSHCD_QUIRK_BROKEN_INTR_AGGR);
>> }
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Keoseong
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> return true;
>>>>>> - else
>>>>>> - return false;
>>>>>> -#else
>>>>>> -return true;
>>>>>> -#endif
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + return (hba->caps & UFSHCD_CAP_INTR_AGGR) &&
>>>>>> + !(hba->quirks & UFSHCD_QUIRK_BROKEN_INTR_AGGR);
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> static inline bool ufshcd_can_aggressive_pc(struct ufs_hba *hba)
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>