[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100511115939.6d68c5dd@virtuousgeek.org>
Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 11:59:39 -0700
From: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org,
Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86 platform driver: intelligent power sharing
driver
On Tue, 11 May 2010 11:38:36 -0400
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 11 May 2010 11:18:54 -0700 Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org> wrote:
>
> > > > > +#define thm_writeb(off, val) writeb((val), ips->regmap + (off))
> > > > > +#define thm_writew(off, val) writew((val), ips->regmap + (off))
> > > > > +#define thm_writel(off, val) writel((val), ips->regmap + (off))
> > > >
> > > > ick.
> > > >
> > > > static inline unsigned short thm_readw(struct ips_driver *ips, unsigned offset)
> > > > {
> > > > readw(ips->regmap + offset);
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > would be nicer.
> > >
> > > Yes, it would.
> >
> > No, I take that back, it just means more typing. This idiom of
> > expecting a given variable to be declared for the IO routines to work
> > is pretty common in drivers,
>
> yeah, but it sucks there, too.
>
> > and saves a bunch of redundant "(ips," everywhere...
>
> It's not redundant - it's C.
>
> grr.
No, it's CPP; this is exactly what preprocessor abuse was intended
for. :)
But it's a mechanical search & replace if someone feels strongly about
it. I'd like to avoid the typing though.
--
Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
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