Re: [PATCH v4 net-next 5/8] sunvnet: straighten up message event handling logic

[Shannon Nelson]

On 2/13/2017 11:06 AM, Joe Perches wrote:

On Mon, 2017-02-13 at 10:57 -0800, Shannon Nelson wrote:

The use of gotos for handling the incoming events made this code
harder to read and support than it should be.  This patch straightens
out and clears up the logic.

Signed-off-by: Shannon Nelson 
---
 drivers/net/ethernet/sun/sunvnet_common.c |   94 ++---
 1 files changed, 45 insertions(+), 49 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/sun/sunvnet_common.c 
b/drivers/net/ethernet/sun/sunvnet_common.c

[]

@@ -738,41 +738,37 @@ static int vnet_event_napi(struct vnet_port *port, int 
budget)

[]

+   /* we don't expect any other bits */
+   BUG_ON(port->rx_event & ~(LDC_EVENT_DATA_READY |
+ LDC_EVENT_RESET |
+ LDC_EVENT_UP));


Is it really necessary to use BUG_ON here?



I'm carrying this from the original code because we want to know asap if 
we have a low level protocol issue.  It should never happen in the 
field, but we want to notice it as soon as we can when doing development 
and testing.  In this patch I've simply made it more obvious and up 
front that we're doing this test rather than having it buried in the 
logic a few lines further down.


sln

Re: [PATCH v4 net-next 5/8] sunvnet: straighten up message event handling logic

[Joe Perches]

On Mon, 2017-02-13 at 10:57 -0800, Shannon Nelson wrote:
> The use of gotos for handling the incoming events made this code
> harder to read and support than it should be.  This patch straightens
> out and clears up the logic.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Shannon Nelson 
> ---
>  drivers/net/ethernet/sun/sunvnet_common.c |   94 
> ++---
>  1 files changed, 45 insertions(+), 49 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/sun/sunvnet_common.c 
> b/drivers/net/ethernet/sun/sunvnet_common.c
[]
> @@ -738,41 +738,37 @@ static int vnet_event_napi(struct vnet_port *port, int 
> budget)
[]
> + /* we don't expect any other bits */
> + BUG_ON(port->rx_event & ~(LDC_EVENT_DATA_READY |
> +   LDC_EVENT_RESET |
> +   LDC_EVENT_UP));

Is it really necessary to use BUG_ON here?