On Mon, 2010-02-01 at 21:00 +0100, ext Menon, Nishanth wrote:
> Ameya Palande said the following on 02/01/2010 07:56 PM:
> > Since vfree() checks for null pointer, there is no need to check is again in
> > MEM_VFree(). This patch also reorganizes the function to make it more 
> > readable.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Ameya Palande <ameya.pala...@nokia.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/dsp/bridge/services/mem.c |   42 
> > +++++++++++++++----------------------
> >  1 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/dsp/bridge/services/mem.c 
> > b/drivers/dsp/bridge/services/mem.c
> > index dfe352d..c2887b3 100644
> > --- a/drivers/dsp/bridge/services/mem.c
> > +++ b/drivers/dsp/bridge/services/mem.c
> > @@ -456,35 +456,27 @@ void MEM_FlushCache(void *pMemBuf, u32 cBytes, s32 
> > FlushType)
> >  void MEM_VFree(IN void *pMemBuf)
> >  {
> >  #ifdef MEM_CHECK
> > -   struct memInfo *pMem = (void *)((u32)pMemBuf - sizeof(struct memInfo));
> > +   struct memInfo *pMem;
> >  #endif
> > -
> > -   DBC_Require(pMemBuf != NULL);
> does'nt this remove a warning for us?
> > -
> >     GT_1trace(MEM_debugMask, GT_ENTER, "MEM_VFree: pMemBufs 0x%x\n",
> > -             pMemBuf);
> > -
> > -   if (pMemBuf) {
> > -#ifndef MEM_CHECK
> > -           vfree(pMemBuf);
> > +                   pMemBuf);
> probably an un-needed formattig change -> messed the diff a little bit 
> here
> 
> > +#ifdef MEM_CHECK
> > +   if (!pMemBuf) {
> > +           GT_1trace(MEM_debugMask, GT_7CLASS,
> > +                   "Invalid allocation or Buffer underflow\n");
> > +           return;
> > +   }
> > +   pMem = (void *)((u32)pMemBuf - sizeof(struct memInfo));
> > +   if (pMem && pMem->dwSignature == memInfoSign) {
> > +           spin_lock(&mMan.lock);
> > +           MLST_RemoveElem(&mMan.lst, (struct list_head *)pMem);
> > +           spin_unlock(&mMan.lock);
> > +           pMem->dwSignature = 0;
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Dumb question: signature should be locked? (yep the prev 
> code was as such)..
> > +           vfree(pMem);
> > +   }
> >  #else
> > -           if (pMem) {
> > -                   if (pMem->dwSignature == memInfoSign) {
> > -                           spin_lock(&mMan.lock);
> > -                           MLST_RemoveElem(&mMan.lst,
> > -                                           (struct list_head *)pMem);
> > -                           spin_unlock(&mMan.lock);
> > -                           pMem->dwSignature = 0;
> > -                           vfree(pMem);
> > -                   } else {
> > -                           GT_1trace(MEM_debugMask, GT_7CLASS,
> > -                                   "Invalid allocation or "
> > -                                   "Buffer underflow at %x\n",
> > -                                   (u32) pMem + sizeof(struct memInfo));
> > -                   }
> > -           }
> > +   vfree(pMemBuf);
> ^^^^^^^^^^ it looks to me that if you put pMemBuf = pMem in the #ifdef 
> case, you could probably move vfree out of the #ifdef altogether..
> >  #endif
> > -   }
> >  }
> >  
> >  /*
> 
> Regards,
> Nishanth Menon

NACK!

Nishanth, thanks for the review :)
I found a better solution, will send patches soon.

Cheers,
Ameya.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to