Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 5/5] xen/vm-event: Misc fixups

[Razvan Cojocaru <rcojocaru@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 6/3/19 3:25 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>   * Drop redundant brackes, and inline qualifiers.
>   * Insert newlines and spaces where appropriate.
>   * Drop redundant NDEBUG - gdprint() is already conditional.  Fix the
>     logging level, as gdprintk() already prefixes the guest marker.
>
> No functional change.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> CC: Razvan Cojocaru <rcojocaru@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> CC: Tamas K Lengyel <tamas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> CC: Petre Pircalabu <ppircalabu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>   xen/common/vm_event.c | 21 ++++++++++++---------
>   1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/xen/common/vm_event.c b/xen/common/vm_event.c
> index 72f42b4..e872680 100644
> --- a/xen/common/vm_event.c
> +++ b/xen/common/vm_event.c
> @@ -102,6 +102,7 @@ static int vm_event_enable(
>   static unsigned int vm_event_ring_available(struct vm_event_domain *ved)
>   {
>       int avail_req = RING_FREE_REQUESTS(&ved->front_ring);
> +
>       avail_req -= ved->target_producers;
>       avail_req -= ved->foreign_producers;
>   
> @@ -168,7 +169,7 @@ static void vm_event_wake_queued(struct domain *d, struct vm_event_domain *ved)
>    */
>   void vm_event_wake(struct domain *d, struct vm_event_domain *ved)
>   {
> -    if (!list_empty(&ved->wq.list))
> +    if ( !list_empty(&ved->wq.list) )
>           vm_event_wake_queued(d, ved);
>       else
>           vm_event_wake_blocked(d, ved);
> @@ -216,8 +217,8 @@ static int vm_event_disable(struct domain *d, struct 
> vm_event_domain **p_ved)
>       return 0;
>   }
>   
> -static inline void vm_event_release_slot(struct domain *d,
> -                                         struct vm_event_domain *ved)
> +static void vm_event_release_slot(struct domain *d,
> +                                  struct vm_event_domain *ved)
But inline is still asking the compiler to try and generate code that 
doesn't end up CALLing an actual function, so is it really redundant 
here? I do realize that for most cases the compiler will have its way 
with this code anyway - especially since the function is static - but 
"static" is not guaranteed to also mean "inline", is it?
In any case,
Acked-by: Razvan Cojocaru <rcojocaru@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>


Thanks,
Razvan

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel