Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1531244 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH] stmmac ethernet: remove cut & paste code

Started byPavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
First post2016-11-28 13:00 +0100
Last post2016-11-28 17:10 +0100
Articles 4 — 2 participants

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [PATCH] stmmac ethernet: remove cut & paste code Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> - 2016-11-28 13:00 +0100
    Re: [PATCH] stmmac ethernet: remove cut & paste code Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> - 2016-11-28 15:30 +0100
      Re: [PATCH] stmmac ethernet: remove cut & paste code Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> - 2016-11-28 15:40 +0100
        Re: [PATCH] stmmac ethernet: remove cut & paste code Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> - 2016-11-28 17:10 +0100

#1531244 — Re: [PATCH] stmmac ethernet: remove cut & paste code

FromPavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Date2016-11-28 13:00 +0100
SubjectRe: [PATCH] stmmac ethernet: remove cut & paste code
Message-ID<sIsLg-1AV-23@gated-at.bofh.it>

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Thu 2016-11-24 14:27:13, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-11-24 at 22:44 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > On Thu 2016-11-24 12:05:25, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2016-11-24 at 12:05 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > > Remove duplicate code from _tx routines.
> > > 
> > > trivia:
> > > 
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c
> > > 
> > > []
> > > > @@ -1960,6 +1960,38 @@ static void stmmac_tso_allocator(struct stmmac_priv *priv, unsigned int des,
> > > >  	}
> > > >  }
> > > >  
> > > > +static void stmmac_xmit_common(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *dev, int nfrags, struct dma_desc *desc)
> > > > +{
> > > > +	struct stmmac_priv *priv = netdev_priv(dev);
> > > > +
> > > > +	if (unlikely(stmmac_tx_avail(priv) <= (MAX_SKB_FRAGS + 1))) {
> > > > +		if (netif_msg_hw(priv))
> > > > +			pr_debug("%s: stop transmitted packets\n", __func__);
> > > 
> > > 		netif_dbg(priv, hw, dev, "%s: stop transmitted packets\n",
> > > 			  __func__);
> > 
> > Not now. Modifying the code while de-duplicating would be bad idea.
> 
> Too many people think overly granular patches are the
> best and only way to make changes.

> Deduplication and consolidation can happen simultaneously.

Can, but should not at this point. Please take a look at the driver in
question before commenting on trivial printk style.

Feel free to do your favourite cleanup on whole tree, or per-driver
basis. Doing it on per-message basis would be wrong thing to do.

Thanks,
									Pavel

-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1531352

FromJoe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Date2016-11-28 15:30 +0100
Message-ID<sIv6q-3fu-35@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1531244
On Mon, 2016-11-28 at 12:50 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Thu 2016-11-24 14:27:13, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Thu, 2016-11-24 at 22:44 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > On Thu 2016-11-24 12:05:25, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 2016-11-24 at 12:05 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > > > Remove duplicate code from _tx routines.
> > > > 
> > > > trivia:
> > > > 
> > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c
> > > > 
> > > > []
> > > > > @@ -1960,6 +1960,38 @@ static void stmmac_tso_allocator(struct stmmac_priv *priv, unsigned int des,
> > > > >  	}
> > > > >  }
> > > > >  
> > > > > +static void stmmac_xmit_common(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *dev, int nfrags, struct dma_desc *desc)
> > > > > +{
> > > > > +	struct stmmac_priv *priv = netdev_priv(dev);
> > > > > +
> > > > > +	if (unlikely(stmmac_tx_avail(priv) <= (MAX_SKB_FRAGS + 1))) {
> > > > > +		if (netif_msg_hw(priv))
> > > > > +			pr_debug("%s: stop transmitted packets\n", __func__);
> > > > 
> > > > 		netif_dbg(priv, hw, dev, "%s: stop transmitted packets\n",
> > > > 			  __func__);
> > > 
> > > Not now. Modifying the code while de-duplicating would be bad idea.
> > 
> > Too many people think overly granular patches are the
> > best and only way to make changes.
> > Deduplication and consolidation can happen simultaneously.
> 
> Can, but should not at this point. Please take a look at the driver in
> question before commenting on trivial printk style.

I had.

It's perfectly acceptable and already uses netif_<level> properly.

This consolidation now introduces the _only_ instance where it is
now improperly using a netif_msg_<type> then single pr_<level>
function sequence that should be consolidated into netif_dbg.

Every other use of netif_msg_<level> then either emits multiple
lines or is used in an if/else.

cheers, Joe

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1531363

FromPavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Date2016-11-28 15:40 +0100
Message-ID<sIvg6-3iM-31@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1531352

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Mon 2016-11-28 06:24:28, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Mon, 2016-11-28 at 12:50 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > On Thu 2016-11-24 14:27:13, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2016-11-24 at 22:44 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > > On Thu 2016-11-24 12:05:25, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, 2016-11-24 at 12:05 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > > > > Remove duplicate code from _tx routines.
> > > > > 
> > > > > trivia:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c
> > > > > 
> > > > > []
> > > > > > @@ -1960,6 +1960,38 @@ static void stmmac_tso_allocator(struct stmmac_priv *priv, unsigned int des,
> > > > > >  	}
> > > > > >  }
> > > > > >  
> > > > > > +static void stmmac_xmit_common(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *dev, int nfrags, struct dma_desc *desc)
> > > > > > +{
> > > > > > +	struct stmmac_priv *priv = netdev_priv(dev);
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > +	if (unlikely(stmmac_tx_avail(priv) <= (MAX_SKB_FRAGS + 1))) {
> > > > > > +		if (netif_msg_hw(priv))
> > > > > > +			pr_debug("%s: stop transmitted packets\n", __func__);
> > > > > 
> > > > > 		netif_dbg(priv, hw, dev, "%s: stop transmitted packets\n",
> > > > > 			  __func__);
> > > > 
> > > > Not now. Modifying the code while de-duplicating would be bad idea.
> > > 
> > > Too many people think overly granular patches are the
> > > best and only way to make changes.
> > > Deduplication and consolidation can happen simultaneously.
> > 
> > Can, but should not at this point. Please take a look at the driver in
> > question before commenting on trivial printk style.
> 
> I had.
> 
> It's perfectly acceptable and already uses netif_<level> properly.
> 
> This consolidation now introduces the _only_ instance where it is
> now improperly using a netif_msg_<type> then single pr_<level>
> function sequence that should be consolidated into netif_dbg.

> Every other use of netif_msg_<level> then either emits multiple
> lines or is used in an if/else.

Are you looking at right driver? I don't see single use of
netif_msg_<level>, but see this at stmmac_main.c:756. Code is actually
pretty consistent using pr_*.

                                if (netif_msg_link(priv))
                                        pr_warn("%s: Speed (%d) not 10/100\n",
                                                dev->name, phydev->speed);

Anyway, I'm moving code around, if you want to do trivial cleanups, do
them yourself.
									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1531417

FromJoe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Date2016-11-28 17:10 +0100
Message-ID<sIwFc-4h2-43@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1531363
On Mon, 2016-11-28 at 15:35 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Mon 2016-11-28 06:24:28, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Mon, 2016-11-28 at 12:50 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > On Thu 2016-11-24 14:27:13, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 2016-11-24 at 22:44 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > > > On Thu 2016-11-24 12:05:25, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > > > > On Thu, 2016-11-24 at 12:05 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > > > > > Remove duplicate code from _tx routines.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > trivia:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > []
> > > > > > > @@ -1960,6 +1960,38 @@ static void stmmac_tso_allocator(struct stmmac_priv *priv, unsigned int des,
> > > > > > >  	}
> > > > > > >  }
> > > > > > >  
> > > > > > > +static void stmmac_xmit_common(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *dev, int nfrags, struct dma_desc *desc)
> > > > > > > +{
> > > > > > > +	struct stmmac_priv *priv = netdev_priv(dev);
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > +	if (unlikely(stmmac_tx_avail(priv) <= (MAX_SKB_FRAGS + 1))) {
> > > > > > > +		if (netif_msg_hw(priv))
> > > > > > > +			pr_debug("%s: stop transmitted packets\n", __func__);
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 		netif_dbg(priv, hw, dev, "%s: stop transmitted packets\n",
> > > > > > 			  __func__);
> > > > > 
> > > > > Not now. Modifying the code while de-duplicating would be bad idea.
> > > > 
> > > > Too many people think overly granular patches are the
> > > > best and only way to make changes.
> > > > Deduplication and consolidation can happen simultaneously.
> > > 
> > > Can, but should not at this point. Please take a look at the driver in
> > > question before commenting on trivial printk style.
> > 
> > I had.
> > 
> > It's perfectly acceptable and already uses netif_<level> properly.
> > 
> > This consolidation now introduces the _only_ instance where it is
> > now improperly using a netif_msg_<type> then single pr_<level>
> > function sequence that should be consolidated into netif_dbg.
> > Every other use of netif_msg_<level> then either emits multiple
> > lines or is used in an if/else.
> 
> Are you looking at right driver?

Yes and I think you should make changes against -next
and not Linus' where this is:

b3e51069627e2 drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c (LABBE Corentin            2016-11-16 20:09:41 +0100  755)                              netif_warn(priv, link, priv->dev,
b3e51069627e2 drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c (LABBE Corentin            2016-11-16 20:09:41 +0100  756)                                         "Speed (%d) not 10/100\n",
b3e51069627e2 drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c (LABBE Corentin            2016-11-16 20:09:41 +0100  757)                                         phydev->speed);

>  I don't see single use of
> netif_msg_<level>, but see this at stmmac_main.c:756. Code is actually
> pretty consistent using pr_*.
> 
>                                 if (netif_msg_link(priv))
>                                         pr_warn("%s: Speed (%d) not 10/100\n",
>                                                 dev->name, phydev->speed);
> 
> Anyway, I'm moving code around, if you want to do trivial cleanups, do
> them yourself.

cheers, Joe

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web