[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d4619f25-12d8-4f95-8e5e-e83516e8230a@broadcom.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2024 11:27:39 -0800
From: Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@...adcom.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
linux-serial@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Al Cooper <alcooperx@...il.com>,
Broadcom internal kernel review list
<bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>, Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] serial: 8250_bcm7271: Replace custom unit
definitions
On 2/15/24 11:21, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 15, 2024 at 10:35:11AM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>> On 2/15/24 08:02, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>
> ...
>
>>> -#define KHZ 1000
>>> -#define MHZ(x) ((x) * KHZ * KHZ)
>>> static const u32 brcmstb_rate_table[] = {
>>> - MHZ(81),
>>> - MHZ(108),
>>> - MHZ(64), /* Actually 64285715 for some chips */
>>> - MHZ(48),
>>> + 81 * HZ_PER_MHZ,
>>> + 108 * HZ_PER_MHZ,
>>> + 64 * HZ_PER_MHZ, /* Actually 64285715 for some chips */
>>> + 48 * HZ_PER_MHZ,
>>
>> The previous notation was IMHO more readable,
>
> I tend to disagree as we read in plain text "frequency is 64 MHz",
> the patch follows natural language.
>
>> can we meet in the middle and do:
>>
>> #define MHZ(x) ((x) * HZ_PER_MHZ
>>
>> and avoid touching the tables entirely?
>
> I don't like the intermediate layer which hides the implementation of MHZ().
> What does it do exactly? You need to look at the internals, with the patch
> applied you immediately see that these are just constants.
>
OK, I suppose today's color is blue for the bike shed.
Reviewed-by: Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@...adcom.com>
--
Florian
Download attachment "smime.p7s" of type "application/pkcs7-signature" (4221 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists