On 13-Jan-21 6:01 PM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:

quoted

quoted

On 13-Jan-21 1:01 PM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:

quoted

quoted

Instead of passing around pointers and integers, collect everything
into struct. This makes API design around these intrinsics much easier.

Signed-off-by: Anatoly Burakov <redacted>
Acked-by: Konstantin Ananyev <redacted>
---

Notes:
      v16:
      - Add error handling

There are few trivial checkpatch warnings, please check

To paraphrase Nick Fury, I recognize that checkpatch has produced
warnings, but given that i don't agree with what checkpatch has to say
in this case, I've elected to ignore it :)

In particular, these warnings related to comments around struct members,
which i think i've made to look nice and also took care of correct
indentation in terms of code looking the same way with different tab
widths. So, i don't think it should be changed, unless you're suggesting
to re-layout comments on top of each member, rather than at the side
(which i think is more readable).

If top is not an option, it is possible to move comment on next after actual field lines:
uint32_t x;
/**<
  * blah, blah
  * blah, blah, blah
  */
AFAIK that would keep checkpatch happy.

It's not as much "not an option" as it would look less readable to me
than what there currently is. If we're going to keep comments not on the
side, then on the top they go. I'd prefer to keep it as is, but if you
feel strongly about it, i can change it.

I don't have any preferences about comments placement.
I just thought it would be good to keep checkpatch happy.
Specially if the changes in question are just cosmetic ones.