On 25/06/26 11:33 am, BALATON Zoltan wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026, Harsh Prateek Bora wrote:
On 24/06/26 7:14 pm, Aditya Gupta wrote:
On 26/06/23 09:24PM, Shivang Upadhyay wrote:
On Tue, 2026-06-23 at 19:49 +0530, Aditya Gupta wrote:
+static const char *pnv_get_machine_type(enum PnvChipType chip_type)
+{
+ if (chip_type == PNV_CHIP_POWER8) {
+ return "powernv8";
+ } else if (chip_type == PNV_CHIP_POWER9) {
+ return "powernv9";
+ } else if (chip_type == PNV_CHIP_POWER10) {
+ return "powernv10";
+ } else if (chip_type == PNV_CHIP_POWER11) {
+ return "powernv11";
+ } else {
+ g_assert_not_reached();
+ }
+}
How about refactoring to the following?
static const char *const machine_types[] = {
[PNV_CHIP_POWER8] = "powernv8",
[PNV_CHIP_POWER9] = "powernv9",
[PNV_CHIP_POWER10] = "powernv10",
[PNV_CHIP_POWER11] = "powernv11",
};
return machine_types[x];
Has a subtle difference, that it may not assert/segfault on unknown
value for x, I want the test to crash/fail if this is called with an
unknown/new processor chip. I believe the if-else/switch is better as it
handles (by 'crashing') unknown values too.
We could just do:
if (chip_type >= PNV_CHIP_MAX) {
g_assert_not_reached();
} else {
return machine_types[chip_type];
}
Or even g_assert(chip_type < PNV_CHIP_MAX); without the if?
Absolutely :)
Regards,
BALATON Zoltan
That way just adding new array entry would work for future chips.
- Aditya G
~Shivang.
