[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YKYuv+pD4lgmrwdu@hovoldconsulting.com>
Date: Thu, 20 May 2021 11:41:19 +0200
From: Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Cc: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>,
Kent Gibson <warthog618@...il.com>,
"open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] gpiolib: Introduce for_each_gpio_desc_if() macro
On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 12:16:20PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 10:33:38AM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 11:15:31AM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 11:07 AM Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org> wrote:
> > > > On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 11:33:39AM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >
> > > > The _if suffix here is too vague.
> > > >
> > > > Please use a more descriptive name so that you don't need to look at the
> > > > implementation to understand what the macro does.
> > > >
> > > > Perhaps call it
> > > >
> > > > for_each_gpio_desc_with_flag()
> > > > or just add the more generic macro
> > > >
> > > > for_each_gpio_desc()
> > > >
> > > > and open-code the test so that it's clear what's going on here.
> >
> > FWIW, NAK due to the non-descriptive for_each_desc_if() name.
>
> Btw, missed argument
>
> ..._with_flag(..., FLAG_...)
>
> breaks the DRY principle. If you read current code it's clear with that
>
> _if(..., FLAG_...)
That we have precisely zero for_each_ macros with an _if suffix should
also give you a hint that this is not a good idea.
Again, you shouldn't have to look at the implementation to understand
what a helper does.
Johan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists