[PATCH v4 3/4] lib: sbi: rename function of sbi_ipi

[Anup Patel]

On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 2:22 PM Xiang W <wxjstz at 126.com> wrote:
>
> Renamed some functions and reused some code
>
> Signed-off-by: Xiang W <wxjstz at 126.com>

The patch subject and commit description needs to be improved.

The subject can be "sbi: tlb: Simplify to tlb_process_count() function"

> ---
>  lib/sbi/sbi_tlb.c | 27 ++++++++++-----------------
>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/sbi/sbi_tlb.c b/lib/sbi/sbi_tlb.c
> index 8bab31a..741f4bb 100644
> --- a/lib/sbi/sbi_tlb.c
> +++ b/lib/sbi/sbi_tlb.c
> @@ -211,7 +211,7 @@ static void tlb_pmu_incr_fw_ctr(struct sbi_tlb_info *data)
>                 sbi_pmu_ctr_incr_fw(SBI_PMU_FW_HFENCE_VVMA_ASID_SENT);
>  }
>
> -static void tlb_entry_process(struct sbi_tlb_info *tinfo)
> +static void tlb_process_helper(struct sbi_tlb_info *tinfo)

No need to rename this function.

>  {
>         u32 rhartid;
>         struct sbi_scratch *rscratch = NULL;
> @@ -229,30 +229,23 @@ static void tlb_entry_process(struct sbi_tlb_info *tinfo)
>         }
>  }
>
> -static void tlb_process_count(struct sbi_scratch *scratch, int count)
> +static int tlb_process_once(struct sbi_scratch *scratch)

This function can return "true" on success and "false" on failure.

>  {
>         struct sbi_tlb_info tinfo;
> -       unsigned int deq_count = 0;
>         struct sbi_fifo *tlb_fifo =
>                         sbi_scratch_offset_ptr(scratch, tlb_fifo_off);
>
> -       while (!sbi_fifo_dequeue(tlb_fifo, &tinfo)) {
> -               tlb_entry_process(&tinfo);
> -               deq_count++;
> -               if (deq_count > count)
> -                       break;
> -
> +       if (!sbi_fifo_dequeue(tlb_fifo, &tinfo)) {
> +               tlb_process_helper(&tinfo);
> +               return 0;
>         }
> +
> +       return -1;
>  }
>
>  static void tlb_process(struct sbi_scratch *scratch)
>  {
> -       struct sbi_tlb_info tinfo;
> -       struct sbi_fifo *tlb_fifo =
> -                       sbi_scratch_offset_ptr(scratch, tlb_fifo_off);
> -
> -       while (!sbi_fifo_dequeue(tlb_fifo, &tinfo))
> -               tlb_entry_process(&tinfo);
> +       while (!tlb_process_once(scratch));
>  }
>
>  static void tlb_sync(struct sbi_scratch *scratch)
> @@ -265,7 +258,7 @@ static void tlb_sync(struct sbi_scratch *scratch)
>                  * While we are waiting for remote hart to set the sync,
>                  * consume fifo requests to avoid deadlock.
>                  */
> -               tlb_process_count(scratch, 1);
> +               tlb_process_once(scratch);
>         }
>
>         return;
> @@ -380,7 +373,7 @@ static int tlb_update(struct sbi_scratch *scratch,
>                  * TODO: Introduce a wait/wakeup event mechanism to handle
>                  * this properly.
>                  */
> -               tlb_process_count(scratch, 1);
> +               tlb_process_once(scratch);
>                 sbi_dprintf("hart%d: hart%d tlb fifo full\n",
>                             curr_hartid, remote_hartid);
>         }
> --
> 2.39.0
>
>
> --
> opensbi mailing list
> opensbi at lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/opensbi

Regards,
Anup