Re: [PATCH] drm/bridge/synopsys: dsi: readl_poll_timeout return value clean up
On 02.03.2018 14:15, Philippe CORNU wrote: > Hi Andrzej, > > > On 03/02/2018 11:21 AM, Andrzej Hajda wrote: >> On 01.03.2018 10:00, Philippe CORNU wrote: >>> Hi Archit, Andrzej & Laurent, >>> >>> May I ask you please your feedback on this small patch? >>> Many thanks, >>> >>> Philippe :-) >>> >>> On 02/04/2018 10:36 PM, Philippe Cornu wrote: The readl_poll_timeout() return value is 0 in case of success so it is better to detect errors without taking care of the return value sign. Signed-off-by: Philippe Cornu >> The patch is of course correct. However I am not sure if necessary. For >> sure functionally it does not change anything. >> AFAIK kernel CodingStyle says nothing about it, so I suppose it is >> matter of personal taste. > I sent this tiny patch in order to homogenize the dw mipi driver because > there were both cases "if (ret)" & "if (ret < 0)" in the source code. > > I did not really find a preferred way in the kernel source code so I > selected what sounds the best to me ie "if (ret)" but it is not a > problem to make another patch for "if (ret < 0)" everywhere :-) > > In any case, the most important from my pov is to have a homogeneous > source code :-) OK Queued to drm-misc-next. Regards Andrzej
Re: [PATCH] drm/bridge/synopsys: dsi: readl_poll_timeout return value clean up
Hi Andrzej,
On 03/02/2018 11:21 AM, Andrzej Hajda wrote:
> On 01.03.2018 10:00, Philippe CORNU wrote:
>> Hi Archit, Andrzej & Laurent,
>>
>> May I ask you please your feedback on this small patch?
>> Many thanks,
>>
>> Philippe :-)
>>
>> On 02/04/2018 10:36 PM, Philippe Cornu wrote:
>>> The readl_poll_timeout() return value is 0 in case of success
>>> so it is better to detect errors without taking care of the
>>> return value sign.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Philippe Cornu
>
> The patch is of course correct. However I am not sure if necessary. For
> sure functionally it does not change anything.
> AFAIK kernel CodingStyle says nothing about it, so I suppose it is
> matter of personal taste.
I sent this tiny patch in order to homogenize the dw mipi driver because
there were both cases "if (ret)" & "if (ret < 0)" in the source code.
I did not really find a preferred way in the kernel source code so I
selected what sounds the best to me ie "if (ret)" but it is not a
problem to make another patch for "if (ret < 0)" everywhere :-)
In any case, the most important from my pov is to have a homogeneous
source code :-)
Does anyone have a preferred choice between "if (ret)" & "if (ret < 0)"
after a "ret = readl_poll_timeout()"?
> Anyway I can give it:
> Reviewed-by: Andrzej Hajda
Many thanks,
Philippe :)
>
> --
> Regards
> Andrzej
>
>>> ---
>>>drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/synopsys/dw-mipi-dsi.c | 10 +-
>>>1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/synopsys/dw-mipi-dsi.c
>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/synopsys/dw-mipi-dsi.c
>>> index 65aeb3f78b48..4d0e8471a15c 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/synopsys/dw-mipi-dsi.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/synopsys/dw-mipi-dsi.c
>>> @@ -342,7 +342,7 @@ static int dw_mipi_dsi_gen_pkt_hdr_write(struct
>>> dw_mipi_dsi *dsi, u32 hdr_val)
>>> ret = qq(dsi->base + DSI_CMD_PKT_STATUS,
>>> val, !(val & GEN_CMD_FULL), 1000,
>>> CMD_PKT_STATUS_TIMEOUT_US);
>>> - if (ret < 0) {
>>> + if (ret) {
>>> dev_err(dsi->dev, "failed to get available command FIFO\n");
>>> return ret;
>>> }
>>> @@ -353,7 +353,7 @@ static int dw_mipi_dsi_gen_pkt_hdr_write(struct
>>> dw_mipi_dsi *dsi, u32 hdr_val)
>>> ret = readl_poll_timeout(dsi->base + DSI_CMD_PKT_STATUS,
>>> val, (val & mask) == mask,
>>> 1000, CMD_PKT_STATUS_TIMEOUT_US);
>>> - if (ret < 0) {
>>> + if (ret) {
>>> dev_err(dsi->dev, "failed to write command FIFO\n");
>>> return ret;
>>> }
>>> @@ -385,7 +385,7 @@ static int dw_mipi_dsi_write(struct dw_mipi_dsi *dsi,
>>> ret = readl_poll_timeout(dsi->base + DSI_CMD_PKT_STATUS,
>>> val, !(val & GEN_PLD_W_FULL), 1000,
>>> CMD_PKT_STATUS_TIMEOUT_US);
>>> - if (ret < 0) {
>>> + if (ret) {
>>> dev_err(dsi->dev,
>>> "failed to get available write payload FIFO\n");
>>> return ret;
>>> @@ -716,13 +716,13 @@ static void dw_mipi_dsi_dphy_enable(struct
>>> dw_mipi_dsi *dsi)
>>>
>>> ret = readl_poll_timeout(dsi->base + DSI_PHY_STATUS, val,
>>> val & PHY_LOCK, 1000, PHY_STATUS_TIMEOUT_US);
>>> - if (ret < 0)
>>> + if (ret)
>>> DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("failed to wait phy lock state\n");
>>>
>>> ret = readl_poll_timeout(dsi->base + DSI_PHY_STATUS,
>>> val, val & PHY_STOP_STATE_CLK_LANE, 1000,
>>> PHY_STATUS_TIMEOUT_US);
>>> - if (ret < 0)
>>> + if (ret)
>>> DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("failed to wait phy clk lane stop state\n");
>>>}
>>>
>
>
Re: [PATCH] drm/bridge/synopsys: dsi: readl_poll_timeout return value clean up
On 01.03.2018 10:00, Philippe CORNU wrote:
> Hi Archit, Andrzej & Laurent,
>
> May I ask you please your feedback on this small patch?
> Many thanks,
>
> Philippe :-)
>
> On 02/04/2018 10:36 PM, Philippe Cornu wrote:
>> The readl_poll_timeout() return value is 0 in case of success
>> so it is better to detect errors without taking care of the
>> return value sign.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Philippe Cornu
The patch is of course correct. However I am not sure if necessary. For
sure functionally it does not change anything.
AFAIK kernel CodingStyle says nothing about it, so I suppose it is
matter of personal taste.
Anyway I can give it:
Reviewed-by: Andrzej Hajda
--
Regards
Andrzej
>> ---
>> drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/synopsys/dw-mipi-dsi.c | 10 +-
>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/synopsys/dw-mipi-dsi.c
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/synopsys/dw-mipi-dsi.c
>> index 65aeb3f78b48..4d0e8471a15c 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/synopsys/dw-mipi-dsi.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/synopsys/dw-mipi-dsi.c
>> @@ -342,7 +342,7 @@ static int dw_mipi_dsi_gen_pkt_hdr_write(struct
>> dw_mipi_dsi *dsi, u32 hdr_val)
>> ret = qq(dsi->base + DSI_CMD_PKT_STATUS,
>> val, !(val & GEN_CMD_FULL), 1000,
>> CMD_PKT_STATUS_TIMEOUT_US);
>> -if (ret < 0) {
>> +if (ret) {
>> dev_err(dsi->dev, "failed to get available command FIFO\n");
>> return ret;
>> }
>> @@ -353,7 +353,7 @@ static int dw_mipi_dsi_gen_pkt_hdr_write(struct
>> dw_mipi_dsi *dsi, u32 hdr_val)
>> ret = readl_poll_timeout(dsi->base + DSI_CMD_PKT_STATUS,
>> val, (val & mask) == mask,
>> 1000, CMD_PKT_STATUS_TIMEOUT_US);
>> -if (ret < 0) {
>> +if (ret) {
>> dev_err(dsi->dev, "failed to write command FIFO\n");
>> return ret;
>> }
>> @@ -385,7 +385,7 @@ static int dw_mipi_dsi_write(struct dw_mipi_dsi *dsi,
>> ret = readl_poll_timeout(dsi->base + DSI_CMD_PKT_STATUS,
>> val, !(val & GEN_PLD_W_FULL), 1000,
>> CMD_PKT_STATUS_TIMEOUT_US);
>> -if (ret < 0) {
>> +if (ret) {
>> dev_err(dsi->dev,
>> "failed to get available write payload FIFO\n");
>> return ret;
>> @@ -716,13 +716,13 @@ static void dw_mipi_dsi_dphy_enable(struct dw_mipi_dsi
>> *dsi)
>>
>> ret = readl_poll_timeout(dsi->base + DSI_PHY_STATUS, val,
>> val & PHY_LOCK, 1000, PHY_STATUS_TIMEOUT_US);
>> -if (ret < 0)
>> +if (ret)
>> DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("failed to wait phy lock state\n");
>>
>> ret = readl_poll_timeout(dsi->base + DSI_PHY_STATUS,
>> val, val & PHY_STOP_STATE_CLK_LANE, 1000,
>> PHY_STATUS_TIMEOUT_US);
>> -if (ret < 0)
>> +if (ret)
>> DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("failed to wait phy clk lane stop state\n");
>> }
>>
Re: [PATCH] drm/bridge/synopsys: dsi: readl_poll_timeout return value clean up
Hi Archit, Andrzej & Laurent,
May I ask you please your feedback on this small patch?
Many thanks,
Philippe :-)
On 02/04/2018 10:36 PM, Philippe Cornu wrote:
> The readl_poll_timeout() return value is 0 in case of success
> so it is better to detect errors without taking care of the
> return value sign.
>
> Signed-off-by: Philippe Cornu
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/synopsys/dw-mipi-dsi.c | 10 +-
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/synopsys/dw-mipi-dsi.c
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/synopsys/dw-mipi-dsi.c
> index 65aeb3f78b48..4d0e8471a15c 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/synopsys/dw-mipi-dsi.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/synopsys/dw-mipi-dsi.c
> @@ -342,7 +342,7 @@ static int dw_mipi_dsi_gen_pkt_hdr_write(struct
> dw_mipi_dsi *dsi, u32 hdr_val)
> ret = readl_poll_timeout(dsi->base + DSI_CMD_PKT_STATUS,
>val, !(val & GEN_CMD_FULL), 1000,
>CMD_PKT_STATUS_TIMEOUT_US);
> - if (ret < 0) {
> + if (ret) {
> dev_err(dsi->dev, "failed to get available command FIFO\n");
> return ret;
> }
> @@ -353,7 +353,7 @@ static int dw_mipi_dsi_gen_pkt_hdr_write(struct
> dw_mipi_dsi *dsi, u32 hdr_val)
> ret = readl_poll_timeout(dsi->base + DSI_CMD_PKT_STATUS,
>val, (val & mask) == mask,
>1000, CMD_PKT_STATUS_TIMEOUT_US);
> - if (ret < 0) {
> + if (ret) {
> dev_err(dsi->dev, "failed to write command FIFO\n");
> return ret;
> }
> @@ -385,7 +385,7 @@ static int dw_mipi_dsi_write(struct dw_mipi_dsi *dsi,
> ret = readl_poll_timeout(dsi->base + DSI_CMD_PKT_STATUS,
>val, !(val & GEN_PLD_W_FULL), 1000,
>CMD_PKT_STATUS_TIMEOUT_US);
> - if (ret < 0) {
> + if (ret) {
> dev_err(dsi->dev,
> "failed to get available write payload FIFO\n");
> return ret;
> @@ -716,13 +716,13 @@ static void dw_mipi_dsi_dphy_enable(struct dw_mipi_dsi
> *dsi)
>
> ret = readl_poll_timeout(dsi->base + DSI_PHY_STATUS, val,
>val & PHY_LOCK, 1000, PHY_STATUS_TIMEOUT_US);
> - if (ret < 0)
> + if (ret)
> DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("failed to wait phy lock state\n");
>
> ret = readl_poll_timeout(dsi->base + DSI_PHY_STATUS,
>val, val & PHY_STOP_STATE_CLK_LANE, 1000,
>PHY_STATUS_TIMEOUT_US);
> - if (ret < 0)
> + if (ret)
> DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("failed to wait phy clk lane stop state\n");
> }
>
>
