Hi Peter,
On 06/05/19 6:04 PM, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfal...@ti.com>
Patch has the following checkpatch warnings and checks which can be fixed:
WARNING: Missing commit description - Add an appropriate one
CHECK: Lines should not end with a '('
#262: FILE: drivers/firmware/ti_sci.c:2286:
+static int ti_sci_cmd_rm_udmap_tx_ch_cfg(
CHECK: Lines should not end with a '('
#323: FILE: drivers/firmware/ti_sci.c:2347:
+static int ti_sci_cmd_rm_udmap_rx_ch_cfg(
CHECK: Lines should not end with a '('
#383: FILE: drivers/firmware/ti_sci.c:2407:
+static int ti_sci_cmd_rm_udmap_rx_flow_cfg1(
CHECK: Lines should not end with a '('
#1414: FILE: include/linux/soc/ti/ti_sci_protocol.h:455:
+ int (*rx_flow_cfg)(
total: 0 errors, 2 warnings, 4 checks, 1399 lines checked
> ---
> drivers/firmware/ti_sci.c | 439 +++++++++++++++
> drivers/firmware/ti_sci.h | 704 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
> include/linux/soc/ti/ti_sci_protocol.h | 216 ++++++++
> 3 files changed, 1359 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/ti_sci.c b/drivers/firmware/ti_sci.c
> index 64d895b80bc3..af3ebcdeab18 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/ti_sci.c
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/ti_sci.c
[..snip.]
> +}
> +
> +static int ti_sci_cmd_rm_psil_pair(const struct ti_sci_handle *handle,
> + u32 nav_id, u32 src_thread, u32 dst_thread)
> +{
All the psil ops doesn't have the kernel-doc function comments. Just be
consistent with other functions :)
> + struct ti_sci_msg_hdr *resp;
> + struct ti_sci_msg_psil_pair *req;
> + struct ti_sci_xfer *xfer;
> + struct ti_sci_info *info;
> + struct device *dev;
> + int ret = 0;
> +
> + if (IS_ERR(handle))
> + return PTR_ERR(handle);
> + if (!handle)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + info = handle_to_ti_sci_info(handle);
> + dev = info->dev;
> +
> + xfer = ti_sci_get_one_xfer(info, TI_SCI_MSG_RM_PSIL_PAIR,
> + TI_SCI_FLAG_REQ_ACK_ON_PROCESSED,
> + sizeof(*req), sizeof(*resp));
> + if (IS_ERR(xfer)) {
> + ret = PTR_ERR(xfer);
> + dev_err(dev, "RM_PSIL:Message reconfig failed(%d)\n", ret);
> + return ret;
> + }
> + req = (struct ti_sci_msg_psil_pair *)xfer->xfer_buf;
> + req->nav_id = nav_id;
> + req->src_thread = src_thread;
> + req->dst_thread = dst_thread;
> +
> + ret = ti_sci_do_xfer(info, xfer);
> + if (ret) {
> + dev_err(dev, "RM_PSIL:Mbox send fail %d\n", ret);
> + goto fail;
> + }
> +
> + resp = (struct ti_sci_msg_hdr *)xfer->xfer_buf;
> + ret = ti_sci_is_response_ack(resp) ? 0 : -EINVAL;
> +
> +fail:
> + ti_sci_put_one_xfer(&info->minfo, xfer);
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
[..snip..]
> + */
> +struct ti_sci_msg_rm_ring_cfg_req {
> + struct ti_sci_msg_hdr hdr;
> + u32 valid_params;
> + u16 nav_id;
> + u16 index;
> + u32 addr_lo;
> + u32 addr_hi;
> + u32 count;
> + u8 mode;
> + u8 size;
> + u8 order_id;
> +} __packed;
> +
> +/**
> + * struct ti_sci_msg_rm_ring_cfg_resp - Response to configuring a ring.
> + *
> + * @hdr: Generic Header
> + */
> +struct ti_sci_msg_rm_ring_cfg_resp {
> + struct ti_sci_msg_hdr hdr;
> +} __packed;
If it is a generic ACK, NACK response, just use the header directly.
[..snip..]
> + */
> +struct ti_sci_msg_rm_udmap_rx_ch_cfg_req {
> + struct ti_sci_msg_hdr hdr;
> + u32 valid_params;
> + u16 nav_id;
> + u16 index;
> + u16 rx_fetch_size;
> + u16 rxcq_qnum;
> + u8 rx_priority;
> + u8 rx_qos;
> + u8 rx_orderid;
> + u8 rx_sched_priority;
> + u16 flowid_start;
> + u16 flowid_cnt;
> + u8 rx_pause_on_err;
> + u8 rx_atype;
> + u8 rx_chan_type;
> + u8 rx_ignore_short;
> + u8 rx_ignore_long;
> + u8 rx_burst_size;
> +
extra line?
> +} __packed;
> +
> +/**
Thanks and regards,
Lokesh
