2013/1/21 Marek Vasut <marex@xxxxxxx>: > Dear Michał Mirosław, > >> 2013/1/21 Marek Vasut <marex@xxxxxxx>: >> > This patch adds support for i.MX23 into the LRADC driver. The LRADC >> > block on MX23 is not much different from the one on MX28, thus this >> > is only a few changes fixing the parts that are specific to MX23. >> >> [...] >> >> > +struct mxs_lradc_of_config { >> > + const int irq_count; >> > + const char * const *irq_name; >> > +}; >> > + >> > +static const struct mxs_lradc_of_config const mxs_lradc_of_config[] = { >> > + [IMX23_LRADC] = { >> > + .irq_count = ARRAY_SIZE(mx23_lradc_irq_names), >> > + .irq_name = mx23_lradc_irq_names, >> > + }, >> > + [IMX28_LRADC] = { >> > + .irq_count = ARRAY_SIZE(mx28_lradc_irq_names), >> > + .irq_name = mx28_lradc_irq_names, >> > + }, >> > +}; >> > + >> > >> > enum mxs_lradc_ts { >> > >> > MXS_LRADC_TOUCHSCREEN_NONE = 0, >> > MXS_LRADC_TOUCHSCREEN_4WIRE, >> > >> > @@ -857,8 +890,19 @@ static void mxs_lradc_hw_stop(struct mxs_lradc >> > *lradc) >> > >> > writel(0, lradc->base + LRADC_DELAY(i)); >> > >> > } >> > >> > +static const struct of_device_id mxs_lradc_dt_ids[] = { >> > + { .compatible = "fsl,imx23-lradc", .data = (void *)IMX23_LRADC, >> > }, + { .compatible = "fsl,imx28-lradc", .data = (void >> > *)IMX28_LRADC, }, + { /* sentinel */ } >> > +}; >> > +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, mxs_lradc_dt_ids); >> > + >> >> Why not s/(void \*)\(IMX.._LRADC\)/\&mxs_lradc_of_config[\1]/ ? > > Check the register layout, it differs between MX23 and MX28, that's one reason, > since were we to access differently placed registers, we can do it easily as in > the SSP/I2C drivers. > > Moreover, there are some features on the MX28 that are not on the MX23 (like > voltage treshold triggers and touchbuttons), with this setup, we can easily > check what we're running at at runtime and determine to disallow these. > > From my point of view, using the number (IMX23_LRADC / IMX28_LRADC) is much more > convenient in the long run. I'm asking, because you don't use this number anywhere other than in mxs_lradc_probe() and there only to dereference the irq-names table. After that the structure and number are forgotten. Sure, it's just an insn or two, so no strong opinion here --- just curious. Best Regards, Michał Mirosław -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html