On 24/01/15 11:02, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 3:48 AM, Ong, Boon Leong
<boon.leong....@intel.com> wrote:
+static int imr_enabled(struct imr_regs *imr)
Do we want to make it inline perhaps since it is 1 liner?
Since it is declared static I would even suggest the new name is_imr_enabled().
I think imr_is_enabled() is a better name. Every other function is imr_
prefixed.
+
+ if ((imr_to_phys(imr.addr_lo) == base) &&
+ (imr_to_phys(imr.addr_hi) == max)) {
I think we need to take care of the size that has been fix-up here ...
+ found = 1;
+ reg = i;
According to your comment this line becomes redundant.
Ah but I still think though.
We eventually do an imr_write(reg, &imr); which I think reads better
than imr_write(i, &imr);
--
BOD
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
