On Fri, Sep 09, 2016 at 02:12:23PM +0200, Daniel Wagner wrote: > From: Daniel Wagner <[email protected]> > > We track the state of the loading with bit ops. Since the state machine
We track the state of the firmware usermode helper loading with bit ops. > has only a couple of states and they are all mutual exclusive there are > only a few simple state transition we can model this simplify. > > UNKNOWN -> LOADING -> DONE | ABORTED If you also do the change suggested below you'd have to annotate that change in the commit log as well. > > Cc: Ming Lei <[email protected]> > Cc: Luis R. Rodriguez <[email protected]> > Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Wagner <[email protected]> > --- > drivers/base/firmware_class.c | 12 +++++------- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/base/firmware_class.c b/drivers/base/firmware_class.c > index 5e38c27..8f5838c 100644 > --- a/drivers/base/firmware_class.c > +++ b/drivers/base/firmware_class.c > @@ -109,7 +109,7 @@ enum { > > struct fw_umh { > struct completion completion; > - unsigned long status; > + u8 status; Sorry I know I suggested the u8 but below you end up still using unsigned long status. Instead of fixing this please consider changing: struct fw_umh { struct completion completion; - unsigned long status; + enum fw_umh_status status; Then you can use the enum fw_umh_status status in function arguments, I've used this trick in other codebases to ensure that the data type for the status passed then matches the same one expected, *and* if you use a switch() statement the compiler will complain and moan about missing values (unless a default switch statement is present). For such simple state machines then this is better practice. > }; > > static void fw_umh_init(struct fw_umh *fw_umh) > @@ -120,7 +120,7 @@ static void fw_umh_init(struct fw_umh *fw_umh) > > static int __fw_umh_check(struct fw_umh *fw_umh, unsigned long status) > { > - return test_bit(status, &fw_umh->status); > + return fw_umh->status == status; Why does this not use READ_ONCE(fw_umh->status) ? Luis
