| Message ID | 3daea226-c5cb-62e7-a025-8f758712a81a@users.sourceforge.net (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Rejected |
| Delegated to: | Shuah Khan |
| Headers | show |
On 11/20/2017 11:19 AM, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > From: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net> > Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 19:10:14 +0100 > > The same assignments were used in an if branch of two separate statements. > > * Merge their condition checks into a single statement instead. > > * Adjust the indentation there. > > This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software. > > Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net> > --- > tools/power/cpupower/lib/cpupower.c | 18 ++++++------------ > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/tools/power/cpupower/lib/cpupower.c b/tools/power/cpupower/lib/cpupower.c > index 9c395ec924de..81c828e5920e 100644 > --- a/tools/power/cpupower/lib/cpupower.c > +++ b/tools/power/cpupower/lib/cpupower.c > @@ -140,18 +140,12 @@ int get_cpu_topology(struct cpupower_topology *cpu_top) > for (cpu = 0; cpu < cpus; cpu++) { > cpu_top->core_info[cpu].cpu = cpu; > cpu_top->core_info[cpu].is_online = cpupower_is_cpu_online(cpu); > - if(sysfs_topology_read_file( > - cpu, > - "physical_package_id", > - &(cpu_top->core_info[cpu].pkg)) < 0) { > - cpu_top->core_info[cpu].pkg = -1; > - cpu_top->core_info[cpu].core = -1; > - continue; > - } > - if(sysfs_topology_read_file( > - cpu, > - "core_id", > - &(cpu_top->core_info[cpu].core)) < 0) { > + if (sysfs_topology_read_file(cpu, "physical_package_id", > + &(cpu_top->core_info[cpu].pkg)) > + < 0 || > + sysfs_topology_read_file(cpu, "core_id", > + &(cpu_top->core_info[cpu].core)) > + < 0) { This change takes the easily readable code into hard to read code, even though it removes the duplicate code in the conditional. Please find a better way to make it not so hard to read. thanks, -- Shuah
>> @@ -140,18 +140,12 @@ int get_cpu_topology(struct cpupower_topology *cpu_top) >> for (cpu = 0; cpu < cpus; cpu++) { >> cpu_top->core_info[cpu].cpu = cpu; >> cpu_top->core_info[cpu].is_online = cpupower_is_cpu_online(cpu); >> - if(sysfs_topology_read_file( >> - cpu, >> - "physical_package_id", >> - &(cpu_top->core_info[cpu].pkg)) < 0) { >> - cpu_top->core_info[cpu].pkg = -1; >> - cpu_top->core_info[cpu].core = -1; >> - continue; >> - } >> - if(sysfs_topology_read_file( >> - cpu, >> - "core_id", >> - &(cpu_top->core_info[cpu].core)) < 0) { >> + if (sysfs_topology_read_file(cpu, "physical_package_id", >> + &(cpu_top->core_info[cpu].pkg)) >> + < 0 || >> + sysfs_topology_read_file(cpu, "core_id", >> + &(cpu_top->core_info[cpu].core)) >> + < 0) { > > This change takes the easily readable code into hard to read code, I got other views around code readability for the shown software design direction. > even though it removes the duplicate code in the conditional. Would you like to reduce a bit of duplicate code here? > Please find a better way to make it not so hard to read. Which source code layout would you find more appropriate then in this use case? Regards, Markus
diff --git a/tools/power/cpupower/lib/cpupower.c b/tools/power/cpupower/lib/cpupower.c index 9c395ec924de..81c828e5920e 100644 --- a/tools/power/cpupower/lib/cpupower.c +++ b/tools/power/cpupower/lib/cpupower.c @@ -140,18 +140,12 @@ int get_cpu_topology(struct cpupower_topology *cpu_top) for (cpu = 0; cpu < cpus; cpu++) { cpu_top->core_info[cpu].cpu = cpu; cpu_top->core_info[cpu].is_online = cpupower_is_cpu_online(cpu); - if(sysfs_topology_read_file( - cpu, - "physical_package_id", - &(cpu_top->core_info[cpu].pkg)) < 0) { - cpu_top->core_info[cpu].pkg = -1; - cpu_top->core_info[cpu].core = -1; - continue; - } - if(sysfs_topology_read_file( - cpu, - "core_id", - &(cpu_top->core_info[cpu].core)) < 0) { + if (sysfs_topology_read_file(cpu, "physical_package_id", + &(cpu_top->core_info[cpu].pkg)) + < 0 || + sysfs_topology_read_file(cpu, "core_id", + &(cpu_top->core_info[cpu].core)) + < 0) { cpu_top->core_info[cpu].pkg = -1; cpu_top->core_info[cpu].core = -1; continue;