Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 5 Oct 2020 11:47:52 +0200 | From | Thierry Reding <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] iommu/tegra-smmu: Rework tegra_smmu_probe_device() |
| |
On Fri, Oct 02, 2020 at 12:53:28PM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote: > On Fri, Oct 02, 2020 at 05:58:29PM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: > > 02.10.2020 17:22, Dmitry Osipenko пишет: > > > 02.10.2020 09:08, Nicolin Chen пишет: > > >> -static void tegra_smmu_release_device(struct device *dev) > > >> -{ > > >> - dev_iommu_priv_set(dev, NULL); > > >> -} > > >> +static void tegra_smmu_release_device(struct device *dev) {} > > > > > > Please keep the braces as-is. > > > > > > > I noticed that you borrowed this style from the sun50i-iommu driver, but > > this is a bit unusual coding style for the c files. At least to me it's > > unusual to see header-style function stub in a middle of c file. But > > maybe it's just me. > > I don't see a rule in ./Documentation/process/coding-style.rst > against this, and there're plenty of drivers doing so. If you > feel uncomfortable with this style, you may add a rule to that > doc so everyone will follow :)
I also prefer braces on separate lines. Even better would be to just drop this entirely and make ->release_device() optional. At least the following drivers could be cleaned up that way:
* fsl-pamu * msm-iommu * sun50i-iommu * tegra-gart * tegra-smmu
And it looks like mtk-iommu and mtk-iommu-v1 do only iommu_fwspec_free() in their ->release_device() implementations, but that's already done via iommu_release_device().
Thierry [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |