Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Thu, 21 Jul 2022 10:54:56 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To:     Tao Zhou <tao.zhou@linux.dev>
Cc:     Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@kernel.org>,
        Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@linux-watchdog.org>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Marco Elver <elver@google.com>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
        Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Gabriele Paoloni <gpaoloni@redhat.com>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
        Clark Williams <williams@redhat.com>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
        linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-trace-devel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V6 01/16] rv: Add Runtime Verification (RV) interface
Message-ID: <20220721105456.1a6a8fb7@gandalf.local.home>
In-Reply-To: <Ytlk4ePA+TpGItJ6@geo.homenetwork>
References: <cover.1658244826.git.bristot@kernel.org>
        <69bb4c369b4f6f12014eb9ca3c28b74e4378c007.1658244826.git.bristot@kernel.org>
        <Ytlk4ePA+TpGItJ6@geo.homenetwork>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 21 Jul 2022 22:38:25 +0800
Tao Zhou <tao.zhou@linux.dev> wrote:

> > +static int enable_monitor(struct rv_monitor_def *mdef)
> > +{
> > +	int retval;
> > +
> > +	if (!mdef->monitor->enabled) {
> > +		retval = mdef->monitor->enable();
> > +		if (retval)
> > +			return retval;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	mdef->monitor->enabled = 1;  
> 
> This should be placed at the end of the last if block. Otherwise
> another assignment may be duplicated because it is already 1 now.
> no?(not sure how compiler treat this..)

It really doesn't matter, it will just sent enabled to one even though it's
already one.

You could simplify this to be:

static int enable_monitor(struct rv_monitor_def *mdef)
{
	int retval;

	if (mdef->monitor->enabled)
		return 0;

	retval = mdef->monitor->enable();

	if (!retval)
		mdef->monitor->enabled = 1;

	return retval;
}

-- Steve