On Tue, 12 May 2009 16:36:01 +0800
Li Yang <le...@freescale.com> wrote:
> Through the newly added IO memory access of RapidIO, sender can
> write directly to recipient's rx buffer, either by cpu or DMA engine.
>
> ...
>
> +/* Definitions for rionet memory map driver */
> +#define RIONET_DRVID 0x101
> +#define RIONET_MAX_SK_DATA_SIZE 0x1000
> +#define RIONET_MEM_RIO_BASE 0x10000000
> +#define RIONET_TX_RX_BUFF_SIZE (0x1000 * (128 + 128))
> +#define RIONET_QUEUE_NEXT(x) (((x) < 127) ? ((x) + 1) : 0)
References its arg multiple times, hence is buggy or inefficient when
passed an expression with side-effects.
static inline int rionet_queue_next(int x)
would be better. Assuming that some sane identifier is used instead of
"x".
> +#define RIONET_QUEUE_INC(x) (x = RIONET_QUEUE_NEXT(x))
It's pretty ugly to hide an assignment inside a macro like this. Why
not do
foo = rionet_queue_inc(foo);
at the callsites? It makes it much clearer for the reader.
>
> ...
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_RIONET_MEMMAP
> +static int rio_send_mem(struct sk_buff *skb,
> + struct net_device *ndev, struct rio_dev *rdev)
> +{
> + struct rionet_private *rnet = netdev_priv(ndev);
> + int enqueue, dequeue;
> +
> + if (!rdev)
> + return -EFAULT;
Is that an appropriate error code?
>
> ...
>
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
