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:   Tue, 20 Dec 2022 21:23:53 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
To:     "Hawa, Hanna" <hhhawa@amazon.com>
Cc:     wsa@kernel.org, jarkko.nikula@linux.intel.com,
        mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com, jsd@semihalf.com,
        linus.walleij@linaro.org, ben-linux@fluff.org,
        linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        dwmw@amazon.co.uk, benh@amazon.com, ronenk@amazon.com,
        talel@amazon.com, jonnyc@amazon.com, hanochu@amazon.com,
        farbere@amazon.com, itamark@amazon.com,
        Lareine Khawaly <lareine@amazon.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/1] i2c: designware: use casting of u64 in clock
 multiplication to avoid overflow
Message-ID: <Y6ILydYEWzJdzwBJ@smile.fi.intel.com>
References: <20221220164806.77576-1-hhhawa@amazon.com>
 <Y6Hs1xwB45K3Ufb8@smile.fi.intel.com>
 <cc16a489-f711-0c54-8576-ef7974b3cb79@amazon.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <cc16a489-f711-0c54-8576-ef7974b3cb79@amazon.com>
Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 07:43:06PM +0200, Hawa, Hanna wrote:
> On 12/20/2022 7:11 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 04:48:06PM +0000, Hanna Hawa wrote:

...

> > > -             return DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST(ic_clk * tSYMBOL, MICRO) - 8 + offset;
> > > +             return DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST_ULL((u64)ic_clk * tSYMBOL, MICRO) - 8 +
> > > +                     offset;
> > 
> > Broken indentation.

...

> > > -             return DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST(ic_clk * (tSYMBOL + tf), MICRO) - 3 + offset;
> > > +             return DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST_ULL((u64)ic_clk * (tSYMBOL + tf),
> > > +                                          MICRO) - 3 + offset;
> > 
> > I would still go with 'MICRO) -' part to be on the previous line despite being
> > over 80, this is logical split which increases readability.
> 
> Okay.. will move the 'MICRO) -' one line before
> > 
> > > -     return DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST(ic_clk * (tLOW + tf), MICRO) - 1 + offset;
> > > +     return DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST_ULL((u64)ic_clk * (tLOW + tf), MICRO) - 1 +
> > > +             offset;
> > 
> > Broken indentation.
> 
> Why it's broken indentation? I'm asking to know for the next time. The word
> 'offset' is not part of DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST_ULL parentheses. In wrong
> indentation the checkpatch shout about it, but it didn't happen with the
> above.

The continuation line of the expression should go under the opening
parentheses, but you are right, the part outside DIV_ should be under
D and not as you suggested below.

But the problem is that you made illogical split while I suggested to leave
DIV_...() on one line and the rest on the other.

> Does the below the correct indentation?

No.

		return DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST_ULL((u64)ic_clk * tSYMBOL, MICRO) -
		       8 + offset;

		return DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST_ULL((u64)ic_clk * (tSYMBOL + tf), MICRO) -
		       3 + offset;

	return DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST_ULL((u64)ic_clk * (tLOW + tf), MICRO) -
	       1 + offset;

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko