[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080310173544.171183fc@ephemeral>
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 17:35:44 -0400
From: Andres Salomon <dilinger@...ued.net>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: adaplas@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fbdev-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, info-linux@...de.amd.com,
jordan.crouse@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] gxfb: create DC/VP/FP-specific handlers rather than
using readl/writel
On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:24:05 -0700
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Sat, 8 Mar 2008 20:48:26 -0500
> Andres Salomon <dilinger@...ued.net> wrote:
>
> > +#define read_dc(reg) readl(par->dc_regs + (reg))
> > +#define write_dc(reg, val) writel((val), par->dc_regs + (reg))
> > +
> > +#define read_vp(reg) readl(par->vid_regs + (reg))
> > +#define write_vp(reg, val) writel((uint32_t) (val), \
> > + par->vid_regs + (reg))
> > +
> > +#define read_fp(reg) readl(par->vid_regs + (reg))
> > +#define write_fp(reg, val) writel((uint32_t) (val), \
> > + par->vid_regs + (reg))
> > +
>
> Not very nice, sorry. They're macros, and macros rather suck. And they
> implicitly rely upon the caller having some variable called "par" in scope.
>
> It would be much nicer to do
>
> /*
> * documentation goes here
> */
> static inline u32 read_dc(struct geodefb_par *par, int reg)
> {
> return readl(par->dc_regs, reg);
> }
>
> no?
I can change it if you'd like (although.. sigh.)
However, it's a lot of extra passing around of the 'par' without any
good reason. Normal I prefer inline functions to macros as well, but
I don't see the point here.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists