linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6/9] ARM i.MX51: Add IPU device support

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 15 Dec 2010 17:26:20 +0100
From:	Arnaud Patard (Rtp) <arnaud.patard@...-net.org>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
	Zhang Lily-R58066 <r58066@...escale.com>,
	linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/9] ARM i.MX51: Add IPU device support

Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> writes:

Hi,

> On Thursday 09 December 2010, Sascha Hauer wrote:
>> +#define imx51_add_ipuv3(pdata) \
>> +       imx_add_ipuv3(&imx51_ipuv3_data, pdata)
>
> This looks  like a pointless abstraction, it does not make
> the code smaller or easier to read. I know it's sometimes
> tempting to use macros, but in most cases, you should try
> not to.
>

it's how things have been handled atm in the imx code. I don't have
any preference on this at all but at least either we go on with it 
or we get rid of all theses #defines. It's a matter of consistency.
The thing is that I would consider removing the imx*add* stuff to be
a cleanup and should be done in a different patch, not in a patchset
adding IPU support for imx51.

Anyway, let's wait for Sascha's point of view, he knows the imx stuff
far better than me.

Arnaud
--
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/