[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 >
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |