[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH v1 04/16] arm/vpl011: use raw spin_lock_{irqrestore,irqsave}



On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 08:52:39AM +0200, Orzel, Michal wrote:
> 
> 
> On 24/06/2025 23:46, dmkhn@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 09:50:54AM +0200, Orzel, Michal wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 24/06/2025 07:46, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 24.06.2025 05:55, dmkhn@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >>>> From: Denis Mukhin <dmukhin@xxxxxxxx>
> >>>>
> >>>> Replace VPL011_{LOCK,UNLOCK} macros with raw spinlock calls to improve
> >>>> readability.
> >>>
> >>> I'm not an Arm maintainer, so I have limited say here, but: How is this
> >>> improving readability? It better utilizes available local variables, yes,
> >>> so this may be a little bit of an optimization, but otherwise to me this
> >>> looks to rather hamper readability.
> >> I agree with Jan here. I don't think it improves readability, therefore I 
> >> don't
> >> think such change is needed.
> >
> > I think exdanding macros helps to understand the code since is explicitly
> > shows what kind of locking *really* used, so this aspect is actually getting
> > more readable; yes, that's a bit of more text.
> >
> > But, MMIO-based flavor does not define such helpers for example, so now 
> > vUARTs
> > follow similar coding pattern which is easy to read/follow.
> I understand your point of view. It's more like a matter of taste here, so I
> won't oppose to it. Others may chime in.

Thank you.

> 
> ~Michal
> 




 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.