[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4DB81A12.1000006@grandegger.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 15:28:50 +0200
From: Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@...ndegger.com>
To: Subhasish Ghosh <subhasish@...tralsolutions.com>
CC: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>, sachi@...tralsolutions.com,
davinci-linux-open-source@...ux.davincidsp.com,
Netdev@...r.kernel.org, nsekhar@...com,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
CAN NETWORK DRIVERS <socketcan-core@...ts.berlios.de>,
m-watkins@...com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/1] can: add pruss CAN driver.
On 04/27/2011 03:08 PM, Subhasish Ghosh wrote:
>>
>> - Use just *one* value per sysfs file
>
> SG - I felt adding entry for each mbx_id will clutter the sysfs.
> Is it ok to do that.
No, see:
http://lxr.linux.no/#linux+v2.6.38/Documentation/filesystems/sysfs.txt#L56
>>>> +static u32 pruss_intc_init[19][3] = {
>>>> + {PRUSS_INTC_POLARITY0, PRU_INTC_REGMAP_MASK, 0xFFFFFFFF},
>>>> + {PRUSS_INTC_POLARITY1, PRU_INTC_REGMAP_MASK, 0xFFFFFFFF},
>>>> + {PRUSS_INTC_TYPE0, PRU_INTC_REGMAP_MASK, 0x1C000000},
>>>> + {PRUSS_INTC_TYPE1, PRU_INTC_REGMAP_MASK, 0},
>>>> + {PRUSS_INTC_GLBLEN, 0, 1},
>>>> + {PRUSS_INTC_HOSTMAP0, PRU_INTC_REGMAP_MASK, 0x03020100},
>>>> + {PRUSS_INTC_HOSTMAP1, PRU_INTC_REGMAP_MASK, 0x07060504},
>>>> + {PRUSS_INTC_HOSTMAP2, PRU_INTC_REGMAP_MASK, 0x0000908},
>>>> + {PRUSS_INTC_CHANMAP0, PRU_INTC_REGMAP_MASK, 0},
>>>> + {PRUSS_INTC_CHANMAP8, PRU_INTC_REGMAP_MASK, 0x00020200},
>>>> + {PRUSS_INTC_STATIDXCLR, 0, 32},
>>>> + {PRUSS_INTC_STATIDXCLR, 0, 19},
>>>> + {PRUSS_INTC_ENIDXSET, 0, 19},
>>>> + {PRUSS_INTC_STATIDXCLR, 0, 18},
>>>> + {PRUSS_INTC_ENIDXSET, 0, 18},
>>>> + {PRUSS_INTC_STATIDXCLR, 0, 34},
>>>> + {PRUSS_INTC_ENIDXSET, 0, 34},
>>>> + {PRUSS_INTC_ENIDXSET, 0, 32},
>>>> + {PRUSS_INTC_HOSTINTEN, 0, 5}
>>>
>>> please add ","
>>
>> Also a struct to describe each entry would improve readability.
>> Then you could also use ARRAY_SIZE.
>
> SG _ I could not follow this, are you recommending that I create a
> structure with three variables and then create
> an array for it.
> something like:
>
> const static struct [] = {
> {
> unsigned int reg_base;
> unsigned int reg_mask;
> unsigned int reg_val;
> },
> ...
> };
Yes:
struct s_name {
unsigned int base;
unsigned int mask;
unsigned int val;
};
const static struct s_name array[] = {
...
};
>
>>>> + value = (PRUSS_CAN_GPIO_SETUP_DELAY *
>>>> + (priv->clk_freq_pru / 1000000) / 1000) /
>>>> + PRUSS_CAN_DELAY_LOOP_LENGTH;
>>
>> This calculation looks delicate. 64-bit math would be safer.
>
> SG - This one works fine. I am dividing it twice to avoid the problem.
Yes, but what if the frequency increases with the next generation of the
hardware?
Wolfgang.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists