| Message ID | b61bfd22e26fd08d9cca73e875c6074a9664c49c.1370236013.git.peter.crosthwaite@xilinx.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
Hi Peter, Am 03.06.2013 07:12, schrieb peter.crosthwaite@xilinx.com: > From: Peter Crosthwaite <peter.crosthwaite@xilinx.com> > > Some cosmetic fixes to char/serial fixing some checkpatch errors. > > Cc: qemu-trivial@nongnu.org > > Signed-off-by: Peter Crosthwaite <peter.crosthwaite@xilinx.com> > --- > Needed for the next patch to pass checkpatch. Done as sep patch to not > obscure that patch. > > hw/char/serial.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++++----------- > 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/hw/char/serial.c b/hw/char/serial.c > index 66b6348..bd6813e 100644 > --- a/hw/char/serial.c > +++ b/hw/char/serial.c > @@ -263,8 +263,9 @@ static gboolean serial_xmit(GIOChannel *chan, GIOCondition cond, void *opaque) > if (s->tsr_retry <= 0) { > if (s->fcr & UART_FCR_FE) { > s->tsr = fifo_get(s,XMIT_FIFO); > - if (!s->xmit_fifo.count) > + if (!s->xmit_fifo.count) { > s->lsr |= UART_LSR_THRE; > + } > } else if ((s->lsr & UART_LSR_THRE)) { > return FALSE; > } else { > @@ -461,10 +462,11 @@ static uint64_t serial_ioport_read(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, unsigned size) > } else { > if(s->fcr & UART_FCR_FE) { > ret = fifo_get(s,RECV_FIFO); > - if (s->recv_fifo.count == 0) > + if (s->recv_fifo.count == 0) { > s->lsr &= ~(UART_LSR_DR | UART_LSR_BI); > - else > + } else { > qemu_mod_timer(s->fifo_timeout_timer, qemu_get_clock_ns (vm_clock) + s->char_transmit_time * 4); Wanna rebreak this one too in case you respin/pull? > + } > s->timeout_ipending = 0; > } else { > ret = s->rbr; > @@ -534,15 +536,21 @@ static uint64_t serial_ioport_read(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, unsigned size) > static int serial_can_receive(SerialState *s) > { > if(s->fcr & UART_FCR_FE) { > - if(s->recv_fifo.count < UART_FIFO_LENGTH) > - /* Advertise (fifo.itl - fifo.count) bytes when count < ITL, and 1 if above. If UART_FIFO_LENGTH - fifo.count is > - advertised the effect will be to almost always fill the fifo completely before the guest has a chance to respond, > - effectively overriding the ITL that the guest has set. */ > - return (s->recv_fifo.count <= s->recv_fifo.itl) ? s->recv_fifo.itl - s->recv_fifo.count : 1; > - else > - return 0; > + if (s->recv_fifo.count < UART_FIFO_LENGTH) { > + /* > + * Advertise (fifo.itl - fifo.count) bytes when count < ITL, and 1 > + * if above. If UART_FIFO_LENGTH - fifo.count is advertised the > + * effect will be to almost always fill the fifo completely before > + * the guest has a chance to respond, effectively overriding the ITL > + * that the guest has set. > + */ > + return (s->recv_fifo.count <= s->recv_fifo.itl) ? > + s->recv_fifo.itl - s->recv_fifo.count : 1; Here I stumbled over the indentation being 5 chars from '(' or 4 chars within, but the latter doesn't make sense since it's terminated before. I would've expected 4 chars from block or aligned below '(' or 4-char-indented from there. But I'm not sure if there are any clear recommendations, so since it's apparently not using tabs (my initial suspicion), no objection. Cheers, Andreas > + } else { > + return 0; > + } > } else { > - return !(s->lsr & UART_LSR_DR); > + return !(s->lsr & UART_LSR_DR); > } > } > >
03.06.2013 09:12, peter.crosthwaite@xilinx.com wrote: > From: Peter Crosthwaite <peter.crosthwaite@xilinx.com> > > Some cosmetic fixes to char/serial fixing some checkpatch errors. These are all cosmetic fixes indeed. I weren't sure we're applying stylistic changes by its own. But apparently people don't object so I don't see why not, either, except that I don't really want to open a can of worms with other stylistic patches to come ;) Applied all 3 to the trivial patches queue. Thank you! /mjt
10.06.2013 19:17, Michael Tokarev пишет: > 03.06.2013 09:12, peter.crosthwaite@xilinx.com wrote: >> From: Peter Crosthwaite <peter.crosthwaite@xilinx.com> >> >> Some cosmetic fixes to char/serial fixing some checkpatch errors. > > These are all cosmetic fixes indeed. I weren't sure we're > applying stylistic changes by its own. But apparently > people don't object so I don't see why not, either, except > that I don't really want to open a can of worms with other > stylistic patches to come ;) > > Applied all 3 to the trivial patches queue. Actually I didn't apply these. Since patch 2/3 weren't sent to -trivial, and 3/3 does not apply without it, I'm not sure I want to apply either of these. Maybe all 3 should be sent to the same tree? Should I pick the 2/3 too, which wasn't submitted to -trivial? Thank you! /mjt
Hi Michael, On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 1:29 AM, Michael Tokarev <mjt@tls.msk.ru> wrote: > 10.06.2013 19:17, Michael Tokarev пишет: >> 03.06.2013 09:12, peter.crosthwaite@xilinx.com wrote: >>> From: Peter Crosthwaite <peter.crosthwaite@xilinx.com> >>> >>> Some cosmetic fixes to char/serial fixing some checkpatch errors. >> >> These are all cosmetic fixes indeed. I weren't sure we're >> applying stylistic changes by its own. But apparently >> people don't object so I don't see why not, either, except >> that I don't really want to open a can of worms with other >> stylistic patches to come ;) >> >> Applied all 3 to the trivial patches queue. > > Actually I didn't apply these. Since patch 2/3 weren't sent to > -trivial, and 3/3 does not apply without it, I'm not sure I want > to apply either of these. Maybe all 3 should be sent to the same > tree? Should I pick the 2/3 too, which wasn't submitted to > -trivial? > Im happy for you to take all three as they have had a week of list time and 2/3 is cleanup only with no functional change. It's borderline as to whether its trivial. Regards, Peter > Thank you! > > /mjt > >
diff --git a/hw/char/serial.c b/hw/char/serial.c index 66b6348..bd6813e 100644 --- a/hw/char/serial.c +++ b/hw/char/serial.c @@ -263,8 +263,9 @@ static gboolean serial_xmit(GIOChannel *chan, GIOCondition cond, void *opaque) if (s->tsr_retry <= 0) { if (s->fcr & UART_FCR_FE) { s->tsr = fifo_get(s,XMIT_FIFO); - if (!s->xmit_fifo.count) + if (!s->xmit_fifo.count) { s->lsr |= UART_LSR_THRE; + } } else if ((s->lsr & UART_LSR_THRE)) { return FALSE; } else { @@ -461,10 +462,11 @@ static uint64_t serial_ioport_read(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, unsigned size) } else { if(s->fcr & UART_FCR_FE) { ret = fifo_get(s,RECV_FIFO); - if (s->recv_fifo.count == 0) + if (s->recv_fifo.count == 0) { s->lsr &= ~(UART_LSR_DR | UART_LSR_BI); - else + } else { qemu_mod_timer(s->fifo_timeout_timer, qemu_get_clock_ns (vm_clock) + s->char_transmit_time * 4); + } s->timeout_ipending = 0; } else { ret = s->rbr; @@ -534,15 +536,21 @@ static uint64_t serial_ioport_read(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, unsigned size) static int serial_can_receive(SerialState *s) { if(s->fcr & UART_FCR_FE) { - if(s->recv_fifo.count < UART_FIFO_LENGTH) - /* Advertise (fifo.itl - fifo.count) bytes when count < ITL, and 1 if above. If UART_FIFO_LENGTH - fifo.count is - advertised the effect will be to almost always fill the fifo completely before the guest has a chance to respond, - effectively overriding the ITL that the guest has set. */ - return (s->recv_fifo.count <= s->recv_fifo.itl) ? s->recv_fifo.itl - s->recv_fifo.count : 1; - else - return 0; + if (s->recv_fifo.count < UART_FIFO_LENGTH) { + /* + * Advertise (fifo.itl - fifo.count) bytes when count < ITL, and 1 + * if above. If UART_FIFO_LENGTH - fifo.count is advertised the + * effect will be to almost always fill the fifo completely before + * the guest has a chance to respond, effectively overriding the ITL + * that the guest has set. + */ + return (s->recv_fifo.count <= s->recv_fifo.itl) ? + s->recv_fifo.itl - s->recv_fifo.count : 1; + } else { + return 0; + } } else { - return !(s->lsr & UART_LSR_DR); + return !(s->lsr & UART_LSR_DR); } }