linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 02/10] pinctrl: alderlake: Switch to INTEL

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]

Message-ID: <aQs3ls1rKgMOufOn@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2025 13:40:06 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 02/10] pinctrl: alderlake: Switch to INTEL_GPP() macro

On Wed, Nov 05, 2025 at 11:31:22AM +0100, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 04, 2025 at 03:56:36PM +0100, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > Replace custom macro with the recently defined INTEL_GPP().

...

> > -#define ADL_GPP(r, s, e, g)				\
> > -	{						\
> > -		.reg_num = (r),				\
> > -		.base = (s),				\
> > -		.size = ((e) - (s) + 1),		\
> > -		.gpio_base = (g),			\
> > -	}
> 
> I wonder if simply doing this:
> 
> #define ADL_GPP(r, s, e, g)	INTEL_GPP(r, s, e, g)

We can, but it will give a couple of lines in each driver still be left.
Do you think it's better?

> is better? Then the amount of changes are smaller.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko