Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3] staging: qlge: Fix indentation issue under long for loop | From | Joe Perches <> | Date | Tue, 12 Jul 2022 07:14:55 -0700 |
| |
On Tue, 2022-07-12 at 16:46 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Sun, Jul 10, 2022 at 02:04:18PM -0700, Binyi Han wrote: > > Fix indentation issue to adhere to Linux kernel coding style, > > Issue found by checkpatch. Change the long for loop into 3 lines. And > > optimize by avoiding the multiplication. > > There is no possible way this optimization helps benchmarks. Better to > focus on readability.
I think removing the multiply _improves_ readability.
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/qlge/qlge_main.c b/drivers/staging/qlge/qlge_main.c [] > > @@ -3007,10 +3007,12 @@ static int qlge_start_rx_ring(struct qlge_adapter *qdev, struct rx_ring *rx_ring > > tmp = (u64)rx_ring->lbq.base_dma; > > base_indirect_ptr = rx_ring->lbq.base_indirect; > > > > - for (page_entries = 0; page_entries < > > - MAX_DB_PAGES_PER_BQ(QLGE_BQ_LEN); page_entries++) > > - base_indirect_ptr[page_entries] = > > - cpu_to_le64(tmp + (page_entries * DB_PAGE_SIZE)); > > + for (page_entries = 0; > > + page_entries < MAX_DB_PAGES_PER_BQ(QLGE_BQ_LEN); > > + page_entries++) { > > + base_indirect_ptr[page_entries] = cpu_to_le64(tmp); > > + tmp += DB_PAGE_SIZE; > > I've previously said that using "int i;" is clearer here. You would > kind of expect "page_entries" to be the number of entries, so it's kind > of misleading. In other words, it's not just harmless wordiness and > needless exposition, it's actively bad.
Likely true.
> I would probably just put it on one line: > > for (i = 0; i MAX_DB_PAGES_PER_BQ(QLGE_BQ_LEN); i++) > base_indirect_ptr[i] = cpu_to_le64(tmp + (i * DB_PAGE_SIZE)); > > But if you want to break it up you could do: > > for (i = 0; i MAX_DB_PAGES_PER_BQ(QLGE_BQ_LEN); i++) > base_indirect_ptr[i] = cpu_to_le64(tmp + > (i * DB_PAGE_SIZE)); > > "tmp" is kind of a bad name. Also "base_indirect_ptr" would be better > as "base_indirect".
tmp is a poor name here. Maybe dma would be better.
MAX_DB_PAGES_PER_BQ(QLGE_BQ_LEN) is also a poorly named macro where all the existing uses are QLGE_BQ_LEN.
And there's base_indirect_ptr and base_indirect_dma in the struct so just base_indirect might not be the best.
tmp = (u64)rx_ring->lbq.base_dma; base_indirect_ptr = rx_ring->lbq.base_indirect;
And clarity is good. Though here, clarity to value for effort though is dubious.
btw: this code got moved to staging 3 years ago.
Maybe it's getting closer to removal time.
| |