[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201104112511.78643f6e@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 11:25:11 +0100
From: Marek BehĂșn <kabel@...nel.org>
To: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
Hayes Wang <hayeswang@...ltek.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/5] r8152: add MCU typed read/write functions
On Wed, 4 Nov 2020 10:47:10 +0200
Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com> wrote:
> > So you aren't complaining about the definition of pla_ and usb_
> > functions, just that they are defined via macros?
>
> Yes.
What if concatenation wasn't used, but the functions were still defined
with macro?
DEFINE_READ_FUNC(pla_ocp_read_byte, u8, MCU_TYPE_PLA, ocp_read_byte)
DEFINE_WRITE_FUNC(pla_ocp_write_byte, u8, MCU_TYPE_PLA, ocp_write_byte)
DEFINE_READ_FUNC(pla_ocp_read_word, u16, MCU_TYPE_PLA, ocp_read_word)
DEFINE_WRITE_FUNC(pla_ocp_write_word, u16, MCU_TYPE_PLA, ocp_write_word)
DEFINE_READ_FUNC(pla_ocp_read_dword, u32, MCU_TYPE_PLA, ocp_read_dword)
DEFINE_WRITE_FUNC(pla_ocp_write_dword, u32, MCU_TYPE_PLA, ocp_write_dword)
DEFINE_READ_FUNC(usb_ocp_read_byte, u8, MCU_TYPE_USB, ocp_read_byte)
DEFINE_WRITE_FUNC(usb_ocp_write_byte, u8, MCU_TYPE_USB, ocp_write_byte)
DEFINE_READ_FUNC(usb_ocp_read_word, u16, MCU_TYPE_USB, ocp_read_word)
DEFINE_WRITE_FUNC(usb_ocp_write_word, u16, MCU_TYPE_USB, ocp_write_word)
DEFINE_READ_FUNC(usb_ocp_read_dword, u32, MCU_TYPE_USB, ocp_read_dword)
DEFINE_WRITE_FUNC(usb_ocp_write_dword, u32, MCU_TYPE_USB, ocp_write_dword)
This way there is no concantenation. Or should I abandon macros at all?
Marek
Powered by blists - more mailing lists