Received: by 2002:a05:6500:1b45:b0:1f5:f2ab:c469 with SMTP id cz5csp1248061lqb; Thu, 18 Apr 2024 04:50:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=2; AJvYcCVHVFhG+5+tuAeUU/ENk2ngBIu8n0ZPzPg4WVK5oHork2NwEMEKqTCJo2RZ5ABT/6GDbDNsvy2YP7HRNNWa1eePFylUL84ujZRLpn5Q5Q== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IE95OUSMixEeaEZR7dQKecnN9fOq63vpnEtp+NfjWOzex5u/Uek2uatUlA9mtaOvSb9Zyw5 X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:172:b0:6a0:4d4f:9428 with SMTP id y18-20020a056214017200b006a04d4f9428mr2904854qvs.32.1713441020088; Thu, 18 Apr 2024 04:50:20 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from ny.mirrors.kernel.org (ny.mirrors.kernel.org. [147.75.199.223]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id if14-20020a0562141c4e00b0069945d8f21fsi1291456qvb.77.2024.04.18.04.50.19 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 18 Apr 2024 04:50:20 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-150006-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.199.223; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=neutral (body hash did not verify) header.i=@intel.com header.s=Intel header.b=kmDKo+Uz; arc=fail (body hash mismatch); spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-150006-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="linux-kernel+bounces-150006-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org"; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=intel.com Received: from smtp.subspace.kernel.org (wormhole.subspace.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ny.mirrors.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C6E4E1C22284 for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2024 11:50:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 652E815E812; Thu, 18 Apr 2024 11:49:35 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="kmDKo+Uz" Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2AC8E15ECD6; Thu, 18 Apr 2024 11:49:31 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.10 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1713440974; cv=none; b=PibL8D/ZGqwjsCy9SHJaZ9mF9pS6v4OWaLyljwALotWQ9JLLJErV8CriAVrTwNe3R0rzdcC6Ud7VpLSgXyVhLV/FtGVTZyZp195yFCOJEZscHBqb1Pxc1KXfIT0E+UeHR9bWgPhHUHeeNZxm5iJhpGGsr4HEWqjxsoCPNIbfeuQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1713440974; c=relaxed/simple; bh=SU/rfWhGkYqdubvUaSDF/Y16iMQ9TRP/vqT/hswgmIo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=bF8oO+XENZubo0jrLKMqeyjEO7EpNocWBNhtf9Mdohr+wzWST6XK6GNJotj76k0tG174FvNqPCClqsacW+1kxPlD1Kfog2NrXlDlfIGdZMZOAHLiLIOW93aLoHH7ThgPHr0X9bz1yXCyrGfTi0o6SjeU4CQaMrMtiMdUn/dWA88= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=kmDKo+Uz; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.10 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1713440973; x=1744976973; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=SU/rfWhGkYqdubvUaSDF/Y16iMQ9TRP/vqT/hswgmIo=; b=kmDKo+Uz/MgY75XBrdCNCVfsdubZBQ00M9nP3uo4qDvHWx0BAdGIBAK3 74VGcQ/5d5iqiIYgs8J1wBxjmmoWynqG6ZNwCHRe1P/IZ77IBTE+qrHzq gLojW6NSbwRY/8ZwAoz/HdpMvTc7+kYBDXcBDhYdovLGjiSYtE6CdWydo I7XanrP0+ZqnZxDOTq3xXwPm0gt+C9E0Nx0DngxIV+avyrCgS22kKPLeX yxBePoFrKw+qBx3QPV/XADhbE6wGCSzJIt+1YVLLz36eXkXdCHSi0Ei3u uVJXgfPAuY3kbbk4aZjYDP/qf7zH1OUDgVT3VitEtqWPOHkZ7pahY/w9N Q==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: rPz8DEp5R7qXmBnvBa7h7Q== X-CSE-MsgGUID: Gs8JqNGXQAKcihxUDlsi8A== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,11047"; a="20372827" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.07,212,1708416000"; d="scan'208";a="20372827" Received: from orviesa009.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.149]) by fmvoesa104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 18 Apr 2024 04:49:31 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: HiZ7wehvTC6AdQrzuj4B/A== X-CSE-MsgGUID: z5uToZu3TTqQwTvyFQQ1eg== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.07,212,1708416000"; d="scan'208";a="22941834" Received: from smile.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.54]) by orviesa009.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 18 Apr 2024 04:49:29 -0700 Received: from andy by smile.fi.intel.com with local (Exim 4.97) (envelope-from ) id 1rxQGc-00000000JaB-2Bwo; Thu, 18 Apr 2024 14:49:26 +0300 Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2024 14:49:26 +0300 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Serge Semin Cc: Viresh Kumar , Vinod Koul , Ilpo =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=E4rvinen?= , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Jiri Slaby , dmaengine@vger.kernel.org, linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] dmaengine: dw: Simplify max-burst calculation procedure Message-ID: References: <20240416162908.24180-1-fancer.lancer@gmail.com> <20240416162908.24180-5-fancer.lancer@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 11:35:39PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote: > On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 10:11:58PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 07:28:58PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote: .. > > > +static void dwc_verify_maxburst(struct dma_chan *chan) > > > It's inconsistent to the rest of _verify methods. It doesn't verify as it > > doesn't return anything. Make it int or rename the function. > > Making it int won't make much sense since currently the method doesn't > imply returning an error status. IMO using "verify" was ok, but since > you don't see it suitable please suggest a better alternative. mend, > fix, align? My suggestion is (and was) to have it return 0 for now. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko