[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMuHMdUexzY6_x19kzPRJW-DxetFC_M1horyTrsA4U9Rs-9g_A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2017 12:06:39 +0200
From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc: Jacopo Mondi <jacopo+renesas@...ndi.org>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
Chris Brandt <chris.brandt@...esas.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Linux-Renesas <linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 02/10] pinctrl: generic: Add macros to unpack properties
On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 10:16 AM, Linus Walleij
<linus.walleij@...aro.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 10:19 AM, Jacopo Mondi
>> +#define PIN_CONF_UNPACK_PARAM(c) ((c) & 0xffUL)
>> +#define PIN_CONF_UNPACK_ARGS(c) ((c) >> 8)
>
> But why.
>
> I have these two static inlines just below your new macros:
>
> static inline enum pin_config_param pinconf_to_config_param(unsigned
> long config)
> {
> return (enum pin_config_param) (config & 0xffUL);
> }
>
> static inline u32 pinconf_to_config_argument(unsigned long config)
> {
> return (u32) ((config >> 8) & 0xffffffUL);
> }
Cool, need...more...context...in...patches ;-)
> Why can't you use this in your code instead of macros?
>
> We generally prefer static inlines over macros because they are easier
> to read.
Sure.
Thanks for noticing!
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
Powered by blists - more mailing lists