[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140305003943.GA1286@kroah.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2014 16:39:43 -0800
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
Cc: Chase Southwood <chase.southwood@...oo.com>,
devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, abbotti@....co.uk,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] Staging: comedi: introduce {outl,inl}_amcc() and
{outl,inl}_iobase() helper functions in hwdrv_apci1564.c
On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 12:27:55PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 02, 2014 at 08:52:19PM -0600, Chase Southwood wrote:
> > This patch introduces a few simple outl and inl helper functions to allow
> > several lines which violate the character limit to be shortened
> > appropriately. It also changes a few macro values which represented
> > offset values from a single unique base value to instead represent the value
> > of that base plus the offset. This is to simplify the use of these macros
> > in the new helper functions.
> >
> > Cc: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Chase Southwood <chase.southwood@...oo.com>
> > ---
> >
> > All right, here's another shot at this. Dan, I took your outl_amcc idea
> > and did a version for the outl/inl calls based from devpriv->iobase as well.
> > I changed all of the macros which only offset from one base value as you
> > had mentioned as well, and the result is starting to look very good.
> > The only outl/inl calls which still look a little gross (see PATCH v2 2/2) are
> > the ones involving DIGITAL_OP_WATCHDOG, TIMER, or any of the COUNTER macros,
> > just because they use a common set of offset macros so simplifying
> > those calls in the same way as the rest isn't possible. What are your
> > thoughts on this version of the patchset?
> >
> > This is version 2 of [PATCH 1/2] Staging: comedi: introduce outl_1564_* and
> > inl_1564_* helper functions in hwdrv_apci1564.c
> >
> > 2: Changed helper functions from {outl,inl}_1564_*() to
> > {outl,inl}_{amcc,iobase}()
> >
> > Comments welcome!
> >
> > .../comedi/drivers/addi-data/hwdrv_apci1564.c | 38 +++++++++++++++++-----
> > 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/comedi/drivers/addi-data/hwdrv_apci1564.c b/drivers/staging/comedi/drivers/addi-data/hwdrv_apci1564.c
> > index 2b47fa1..58e301d 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/comedi/drivers/addi-data/hwdrv_apci1564.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/comedi/drivers/addi-data/hwdrv_apci1564.c
> > @@ -49,25 +49,25 @@ This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but WITHOUT ANY
> > /* DIGITAL INPUT-OUTPUT DEFINE */
> > /* Input defines */
> > #define APCI1564_DIGITAL_IP 0x04
> > -#define APCI1564_DIGITAL_IP_INTERRUPT_MODE1 4
> > -#define APCI1564_DIGITAL_IP_INTERRUPT_MODE2 8
> > -#define APCI1564_DIGITAL_IP_IRQ 16
> > +#define APCI1564_DIGITAL_IP_INTERRUPT_MODE1 (0x04 + 0x04)
> > +#define APCI1564_DIGITAL_IP_INTERRUPT_MODE2 (0x04 + 0x08)
> > +#define APCI1564_DIGITAL_IP_IRQ (0x04 + 0x10)
>
> You can't change these without changing the callers. This bit needs to
> be in patch 2/2. You should probably just merge both patches anyway
> because presumably this one adds some GCC warnings about unused static
> functions.
I'm totally confused about this series...
Chase, can you resend any outstanding patches that I haven't applied of
yours, as these different revisions and threads don't make much sense
right now.
thanks,
greg k-h
--
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