| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <BD79186B4FD85F4B8E60E381CAEE190901B7783E@mi8nycmail19.Mi8.com> Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 20:48:49 -0400 From: "H Hartley Sweeten" <hartleys@...ionengravers.com> To: "David Brownell" <david-b@...bell.net> Cc: "Linux Kernel" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: RE: [PATCH] gpiolib: introduce for_each_gpio_in_chip macro On Tuesday, August 04, 2009 2:14 PM, David Brownell wrote: > On Friday 31 July 2009, H Hartley Sweeten wrote: >> gpiolib: introduce for_each_gpio_in_chip macro >> >> There are a number of places in gpiolib where all the gpio's handled by a >> chip are walked thru using a for() loop. This introduces a for_each_* >> macro to clarify the code. > > I'd rather not. There are four such loops, and these are > really simple iterators. Such a macro IMO just obfuscates, > when it's just hiding such trivial index ops. > > NAK. Ok. For the record. The reason I sent this is I'm trying to work out an extension to gpiolib that adds gpio_port_* access to the API. Most of the gpiolib drivers already the necessary logic since the raw I/O is performed on the entire 'chip'. The API just needs the extensions added to request/free the port, set the direction and get/set the value. Is this a worthwhile addition? Regards, Hartley -- 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