mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
Cc: Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org>,
	Christopher Covington <cov@codeaurora.org>,
	"linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
	Timur Tabi <timur@codeaurora.org>,
	jcm@redhat.com, helgaas@kernel.org, Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V9 1/2] ACPI, PCI, irq: remove interrupt count restriction
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 2016 14:50:57 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2131424.aXhRMSo6AO@vostro.rjw.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHp75VfKeJodVtTLUS=dzzOgjydsRSEiLyLRbLQn5SW=CyVFnw@mail.gmail.com>

On Monday, January 04, 2016 11:01:05 AM Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 1, 2016 at 2:48 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net> wrote:
> > On Wednesday, December 30, 2015 09:55:35 PM Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >> On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 9:17 PM, Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org> wrote:
> >> > On 12/30/2015 8:28 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >> >> Yep, I meant not to use an additional variable.
> >> >>
> >> >>> > BTW, I suggest you spend some time around checkpatch for contributions. I could
> >> >>> > have caught most of the issues you are generally concerned before submitting a patch.
> >> >> Is it a question?
> >> >
> >> > It is a request not a question. I hate wasting your time and my time with things that I could
> >> > have fixed before submitting a patch.
> >> >
> >> > I ran the checkpatch and it said I'm good to go. But, obviously I'm not.
> >>
> >> Hmm… checkpatch.pl is just a small helper to fix style issues. Here is
> >> just a common sense rule, or kind of Occam's razor: no need to have
> >> more variables then needed if it doesn't improve something really
> >> significantly.
> >
> > That said, compilers optimize things anyway, so using an extra local variable
> > shouldn't matter for the resulting machine code.
> 
> I'm not totally against that, but is the additional variable helpful here?

Well, I guess you can argue both ways.

Surely, the same result can be achieved with fewer lines of code if that's
what you mean, so what about the following change on top of the $subject patch?

---
From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Subject: [PATCH] ACPI / PCI: Simplify acpi_penalize_isa_irq()

acpi_penalize_isa_irq() can be written in fewer lines of code,
so do that.  No functional change.

Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
---
 drivers/acpi/pci_link.c |   14 +++-----------
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

Index: linux-pm/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c
===================================================================
--- linux-pm.orig/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c
+++ linux-pm/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c
@@ -877,17 +877,9 @@ static int __init acpi_irq_penalty_updat
  */
 void acpi_penalize_isa_irq(int irq, int active)
 {
-	int penalty;
-
-	if (irq < 0)
-		return;
-
-	if (active)
-		penalty = PIRQ_PENALTY_ISA_USED;
-	else
-		penalty = PIRQ_PENALTY_PCI_USING;
-
-	acpi_irq_add_penalty(irq, penalty);
+	if (irq >= 0)
+		acpi_irq_add_penalty(irq, active ?
+			PIRQ_PENALTY_ISA_USED : PIRQ_PENALTY_PCI_USING);
 }
 
 bool acpi_isa_irq_available(int irq)


  reply	other threads:[~2016-01-04 13:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <1449677909-12432-1-git-send-email-okaya@codeaurora.org>
2015-12-09 16:18 ` Sinan Kaya
2015-12-09 16:59   ` Andy Shevchenko
2015-12-09 17:09     ` Sinan Kaya
2015-12-09 17:14       ` Christopher Covington
2015-12-30 13:23         ` Sinan Kaya
2015-12-30 13:28           ` Andy Shevchenko
2015-12-30 19:17             ` Sinan Kaya
2015-12-30 19:55               ` Andy Shevchenko
2016-01-01  0:48                 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-01-04  9:01                   ` Andy Shevchenko
2016-01-04 13:50                     ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2016-01-04 13:34                       ` Andy Shevchenko
2015-12-09 16:18 ` [PATCH V9 2/2] ACPI, PCI, irq: remove interrupt number restriction Sinan Kaya

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=2131424.aXhRMSo6AO@vostro.rjw.lan \
    --to=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=andy.shevchenko@gmail.com \
    --cc=cov@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=helgaas@kernel.org \
    --cc=jcm@redhat.com \
    --cc=lenb@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=okaya@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=timur@codeaurora.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®