On Sun, 7 Oct 2012, Joe Perches wrote:
On Sun, 2012-10-07 at 20:56 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
Some people thought that it would be nice to have the macros rather than
the inlined field initializations, especially since there is no flag for
write. A separate question is whether an array of one element is useful,
or whether one should systematically use & on a simple variable of the
structure type. I'm open to suggestions about either point.
I think the macro naming is not great.
Maybe add DEFINE_/DECLARE_/_INIT or something other than an action
name type to the macro names.
DEFINE and DECLARE usually have a declared variable as an argument, which
is not the case here.
These macros are like the macros PCI_DEVICE and PCI_DEVICE_CLASS.
I understand that.
Are READ and WRITE the action names? They are really the important
information in this case.
Yes, most (all?) uses of _READ and _WRITE macros actually
perform some I/O.
I2C_MSG_READ_DATA?
I2C_MSG_READ_INFO?
I2C_MSG_READ_INIT?
I2C_MSG_PREPARE_READ?
julia
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
