Tue, 13 May 2014 13:28:28 -0300 от Fabio Estevam <festevam@xxxxxxxxx>:
> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 1:24 PM, Alexander Shiyan <shc_work@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Tue, 13 May 2014 13:18:40 -0300 от Fabio Estevam <festevam@xxxxxxxxx>:
> >> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 1:05 PM, Alexander Shiyan <shc_work@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >> > + clk[IMX1_CLK_DUMMY] =
> >> > + imx_clk_fixed("dummy", 0);
> >> > + clk[IMX1_CLK_CLK32] =
> >> > + imx_obtain_fixed_clock("clk32", fref);
> >> > + clk[IMX1_CLK_CLK16M_EXT] =
> >> > + imx_clk_fixed("clk16m_ext", 16000000);
> >> > + clk[IMX1_CLK_CLK16M] =
> >> > + imx_clk_gate("clk16m", "clk16m_ext", CCM_CSCR, 17);
> >>
> >> Why don't you put each entry into a single line instead?
> >>
> >> Even if it gets larger than 80 columns, it would be easier to read.
> >
> > I thought about it, but came to the conclusion that it is better to observe
> > the kernel rules.
>
> Do you mean checkpatch complaint?
>
> Then try to make checkpatch happy with other clock file such as
> arch/arm/mach-imx/clk-imx6q.
>
> The result will be unreadable :-)
As another solution we can use macros, something like this:
#define IMXCLK_MUX(id, name, reg, off, sz, arr) \
clk[id] = imx_clk_mux(name, reg, off, sz, arr, ARRAY_SIZE(arr))
...
IMXCLK_MUX(IMX1_CLK_PREM, "prem", CCM_CSCR, 16, 1, prem_sel_clks);
---
��.n��������+%������w��{.n����z�{��ܨ}���Ơz�j:+v�����w����ޙ��&�)ߡ�a����z�ޗ���ݢj��w�f
