Re: [PATCH v4 5/6] irqchip/gic-v3-its: Fix grammar and replace a bit number with its symbol
From: Radu Rendec <hidden>
Date: 2026-07-04 15:37:44
Also in:
lkml
On Thu, 2026-07-02 at 11:30 +0800, Kemeng Shi wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
Fix grammatical errors in comments and replace the bit offset '62' with GITS_BASER_INDIRECT for better readability. Signed-off-by: Kemeng Shi <shikemeng@huaweicloud.com> --- drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c index 244509701070..120f6f29e978 100644 --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c@@ -163,7 +163,7 @@ struct event_lpi_map {/* * The ITS view of a device - belongs to an ITS, owns an interrupt - * translation table, and a list of interrupts. If it some of its + * translation table, and a list of interrupts. If some of its * LPIs are injected into a guest (GICv4), the event_map.vm field * indicates which one. */@@ -2504,7 +2504,7 @@ static bool its_parse_indirect_baser(struct its_node *its,if ((esz << ids) > (psz * 2)) { /* * Find out whether hw supports a single or two-level table by - * table by reading bit at offset '62' after writing '1' to it. + * reading GITS_BASER_INDIRECT after writing '1' to it.
I think the second line is redundant anyway. Anyone who can read C can immediately see the code is checking the bit after setting it to 1. The not so obvious part is that the read back happens in its_write_baser(). But the way the code is written implies that baser->val is somehow updated in its_write_baser(), and if one looks at it, then it's clear. In the original comment, "table by" appeared twice. I would just get rid of the second line altogether and stop at "table".
*/ its_write_baser(its, baser, val | GITS_BASER_INDIRECT); indirect = !!(baser->val & GITS_BASER_INDIRECT);