On Tue 2014-07-08 13:42:28, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 01:31:09PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > + read_reg = readl(mc_vbase + DRAMADDRW); > > > + > > > + width = readl(mc_vbase + DRAMIFWIDTH); > > > + > > > + col = (read_reg & DRAMADDRW_COLBIT_MASK) >> > > > + DRAMADDRW_COLBIT_LSB; > > > + row = (read_reg & DRAMADDRW_ROWBIT_MASK) >> > > > + DRAMADDRW_ROWBIT_LSB; > > > + bank = (read_reg & DRAMADDRW_BANKBIT_MASK) >> > > > + DRAMADDRW_BANKBIT_LSB; > > > + cs = (read_reg & DRAMADDRW_CSBIT_MASK) >> > > > + DRAMADDRW_CSBIT_LSB; > > > > As I said, all the defines only make this harder to read. The code is > > pretty obvious if you put numbers in here... > > Since when it is a good coding practice to put naked numbers instead of > descriptive macro names??! > > Now, I can understand that the macro names could be made more > descriptive so that you can understand what they mean, but naked > numbers?! You must be joking although 1st of April is long gone. I'm not joking. Try to understand and verify the code above. You can't. The "descriptive macro names" are useless; all the code does is split register in pieces. With the numbers it would be very obvious. Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
