On 24/01/2024 15:26, Herve Codina wrote:
Hi Vadim,
On Wed, 24 Jan 2024 10:10:46 +0000
Vadim Fedorenko <vadim.fedore...@linux.dev> wrote:
[...]
+static int qmc_hdlc_xlate_slot_map(struct qmc_hdlc *qmc_hdlc,
+ u32 slot_map, struct qmc_chan_ts_info
*ts_info)
+{
+ u64 ts_mask_avail;
+ unsigned int bit;
+ unsigned int i;
+ u64 ts_mask;
+ u64 map;
+
+ /* Tx and Rx masks must be identical */
+ if (ts_info->rx_ts_mask_avail != ts_info->tx_ts_mask_avail) {
+ dev_err(qmc_hdlc->dev, "tx and rx available timeslots mismatch
(0x%llx, 0x%llx)\n",
+ ts_info->rx_ts_mask_avail, ts_info->tx_ts_mask_avail);
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+
+ ts_mask_avail = ts_info->rx_ts_mask_avail;
+ ts_mask = 0;
+ map = slot_map;
+ bit = 0;
+ for (i = 0; i < 64; i++) {
+ if (ts_mask_avail & BIT_ULL(i)) {
+ if (map & BIT_ULL(bit))
+ ts_mask |= BIT_ULL(i);
+ bit++;
+ }
+ }
+
+ if (hweight64(ts_mask) != hweight64(map)) {
+ dev_err(qmc_hdlc->dev, "Cannot translate timeslots 0x%llx ->
(0x%llx,0x%llx)\n",
+ map, ts_mask_avail, ts_mask);
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+
+ ts_info->tx_ts_mask = ts_mask;
+ ts_info->rx_ts_mask = ts_mask;
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int qmc_hdlc_xlate_ts_info(struct qmc_hdlc *qmc_hdlc,
+ const struct qmc_chan_ts_info *ts_info, u32
*slot_map)
+{
+ u64 ts_mask_avail;
+ unsigned int bit;
+ unsigned int i;
+ u64 ts_mask;
+ u64 map;
+
Starting from here ...
+ /* Tx and Rx masks must be identical */
+ if (ts_info->rx_ts_mask_avail != ts_info->tx_ts_mask_avail) {
+ dev_err(qmc_hdlc->dev, "tx and rx available timeslots mismatch
(0x%llx, 0x%llx)\n",
+ ts_info->rx_ts_mask_avail, ts_info->tx_ts_mask_avail);
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+ if (ts_info->rx_ts_mask != ts_info->tx_ts_mask) {
+ dev_err(qmc_hdlc->dev, "tx and rx timeslots mismatch (0x%llx,
0x%llx)\n",
+ ts_info->rx_ts_mask, ts_info->tx_ts_mask);
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+
+ ts_mask_avail = ts_info->rx_ts_mask_avail;
+ ts_mask = ts_info->rx_ts_mask;
+ map = 0;
+ bit = 0;
+ for (i = 0; i < 64; i++) {
+ if (ts_mask_avail & BIT_ULL(i)) {
+ if (ts_mask & BIT_ULL(i))
+ map |= BIT_ULL(bit);
+ bit++;
+ }
+ }
+
+ if (hweight64(ts_mask) != hweight64(map)) {
+ dev_err(qmc_hdlc->dev, "Cannot translate timeslots (0x%llx,0x%llx)
-> 0x%llx\n",
+ ts_mask_avail, ts_mask, map);
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+
till here the block looks like copy of the block from previous function.
It worth to make a separate function for it, I think.
+ if (map >= BIT_ULL(32)) {
+ dev_err(qmc_hdlc->dev, "Slot map out of 32bit (0x%llx,0x%llx) ->
0x%llx\n",
+ ts_mask_avail, ts_mask, map);
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+
+ *slot_map = map;
+ return 0;
+}
+
[...]
I am not so sure. There are slighty differences between the two functions.
The error messages and, in particular, the loop in qmc_hdlc_xlate_slot_map() is:
--- 8< ---
ts_mask_avail = ts_info->rx_ts_mask_avail;
ts_mask = 0;
map = slot_map;
bit = 0;
for (i = 0; i < 64; i++) {
if (ts_mask_avail & BIT_ULL(i)) {
if (map & BIT_ULL(bit))
ts_mask |= BIT_ULL(i);
bit++;
}
}
--- 8< ---
whereas it is the following in qmc_hdlc_xlate_ts_info():
--- 8< ---
ts_mask_avail = ts_info->rx_ts_mask_avail;
ts_mask = ts_info->rx_ts_mask;
map = 0;
bit = 0;
for (i = 0; i < 64; i++) {
if (ts_mask_avail & BIT_ULL(i)) {
if (ts_mask & BIT_ULL(i))
map |= BIT_ULL(bit);
bit++;
}
}
--- 8< ---
ts_map and map initializations are not the same, i and bit are not used for
the same purpose and the computed value is not computed based on the same
information.
With that pointed, I am not sure that having some common code for both
function will be relevant. Your opinion ?
I see. I'm just thinking if it's possible to use helpers from bitops.h
and bitmap.h here to avoid open-coding common parts of the code.
Best regards,
Hervé
