ufs: core: Combine ufshcd_mq_poll_cqe functions

[PATCH v2] ufs: core: Combine ufshcd_mq_poll_cqe functions

Posted by Stanley Chu 2 years, 8 months ago

Currently, ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_nolock() is only called by
ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_lock() with the addition of a spinlock wrapper
for ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_nolock(). Combining these two functions
into one would result in cleaner code.

Reviewed-by: Bao D. Nguyen <quic_nguyenb@quicinc.com>
Signed-off-by: Stanley Chu <stanley.chu@mediatek.com>
---
 drivers/ufs/core/ufs-mcq.c | 17 ++++-------------
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/ufs/core/ufs-mcq.c b/drivers/ufs/core/ufs-mcq.c
index 920eb954f594..785fc9762cad 100644
--- a/drivers/ufs/core/ufs-mcq.c
+++ b/drivers/ufs/core/ufs-mcq.c
@@ -307,11 +307,13 @@ void ufshcd_mcq_compl_all_cqes_lock(struct ufs_hba *hba,
 	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&hwq->cq_lock, flags);
 }
 
-static unsigned long ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_nolock(struct ufs_hba *hba,
-						struct ufs_hw_queue *hwq)
+unsigned long ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_lock(struct ufs_hba *hba,
+				       struct ufs_hw_queue *hwq)
 {
 	unsigned long completed_reqs = 0;
+	unsigned long flags;
 
+	spin_lock_irqsave(&hwq->cq_lock, flags);
 	ufshcd_mcq_update_cq_tail_slot(hwq);
 	while (!ufshcd_mcq_is_cq_empty(hwq)) {
 		ufshcd_mcq_process_cqe(hba, hwq);
@@ -321,17 +323,6 @@ static unsigned long ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_nolock(struct ufs_hba *hba,
 
 	if (completed_reqs)
 		ufshcd_mcq_update_cq_head(hwq);
-
-	return completed_reqs;
-}
-
-unsigned long ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_lock(struct ufs_hba *hba,
-				       struct ufs_hw_queue *hwq)
-{
-	unsigned long completed_reqs, flags;
-
-	spin_lock_irqsave(&hwq->cq_lock, flags);
-	completed_reqs = ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_nolock(hba, hwq);
 	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&hwq->cq_lock, flags);
 
 	return completed_reqs;
-- 
2.18.0

Re: [PATCH v2] ufs: core: Combine ufshcd_mq_poll_cqe functions

Posted by Martin K. Petersen 2 years, 8 months ago

Stanley,

> Currently, ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_nolock() is only called by
> ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_lock() with the addition of a spinlock wrapper
> for ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_nolock(). Combining these two functions
> into one would result in cleaner code.

Applied to 6.5/scsi-staging, thanks!

-- 
Martin K. Petersen	Oracle Linux Engineering

Re: [PATCH v2] ufs: core: Combine ufshcd_mq_poll_cqe functions

Posted by Bart Van Assche 2 years, 8 months ago

On 6/1/23 15:50, Stanley Chu wrote:
> Currently, ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_nolock() is only called by
> ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_lock() with the addition of a spinlock wrapper
> for ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_nolock(). Combining these two functions
> into one would result in cleaner code.

For future patches, please use the imperative mood for the patch
description ("would result in" -> "results in"). Additionally, a
follow-up patch that renames ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_lock() into
ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe() would be welcome. Anyway:

Reviewed-by: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>

Re: [PATCH v2] ufs: core: Combine ufshcd_mq_poll_cqe functions

Posted by Bean Huo 2 years, 8 months ago

On 02.06.23 12:50 AM, Stanley Chu wrote:
> Currently, ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_nolock() is only called by
> ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_lock() with the addition of a spinlock wrapper
> for ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_nolock(). Combining these two functions
> into one would result in cleaner code.
>
> Reviewed-by: Bao D. Nguyen<quic_nguyenb@quicinc.com>
> Signed-off-by: Stanley Chu<stanley.chu@mediatek.com>
Acked-by: Bean Huo <beanhuo@micron.com>

RE: [PATCH v2] ufs: core: Combine ufshcd_mq_poll_cqe functions

Posted by Keoseong Park 2 years, 8 months ago

>Currently, ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_nolock() is only called by
>ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_lock() with the addition of a spinlock wrapper
>for ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_nolock(). Combining these two functions
>into one would result in cleaner code.
>
>Reviewed-by: Bao D. Nguyen <quic_nguyenb@quicinc.com>
>Signed-off-by: Stanley Chu <stanley.chu@mediatek.com>
>---
> drivers/ufs/core/ufs-mcq.c | 17 ++++-------------
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>
>diff --git a/drivers/ufs/core/ufs-mcq.c b/drivers/ufs/core/ufs-mcq.c
>index 920eb954f594..785fc9762cad 100644
>--- a/drivers/ufs/core/ufs-mcq.c
>+++ b/drivers/ufs/core/ufs-mcq.c
>@@ -307,11 +307,13 @@ void ufshcd_mcq_compl_all_cqes_lock(struct ufs_hba *hba,
> 	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&hwq->cq_lock, flags);
> }
> 
>-static unsigned long ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_nolock(struct ufs_hba *hba,
>-						struct ufs_hw_queue *hwq)
>+unsigned long ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_lock(struct ufs_hba *hba,
>+				       struct ufs_hw_queue *hwq)
> {
> 	unsigned long completed_reqs = 0;
>+	unsigned long flags;
> 
>+	spin_lock_irqsave(&hwq->cq_lock, flags);
> 	ufshcd_mcq_update_cq_tail_slot(hwq);
> 	while (!ufshcd_mcq_is_cq_empty(hwq)) {
> 		ufshcd_mcq_process_cqe(hba, hwq);
>@@ -321,17 +323,6 @@ static unsigned long ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_nolock(struct ufs_hba *hba,
> 
> 	if (completed_reqs)
> 		ufshcd_mcq_update_cq_head(hwq);
>-
>-	return completed_reqs;
>-}
>-
>-unsigned long ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_lock(struct ufs_hba *hba,
>-				       struct ufs_hw_queue *hwq)
>-{
>-	unsigned long completed_reqs, flags;
>-
>-	spin_lock_irqsave(&hwq->cq_lock, flags);
>-	completed_reqs = ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_nolock(hba, hwq);
> 	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&hwq->cq_lock, flags);
> 
> 	return completed_reqs;
>-- 
>2.18.0
>

Looks good to me.

Reviewed-by: Keoseong Park <keosung.park@samsung.com>

Best Regards,
Keoseong