> use read_poll_timeout macro to redefined regmap_read_poll_timeout
> and also remove the duplicate code.
How do you think about a wording variant like the following?
Subject:
[PATCH 1/2] regmap: Simplify implementation of the regmap_read_poll_timeout() macro
Change description:
Simplify the implementation of the macro “regmap_read_poll_timeout”
by using the macro “read_poll_timeout”.
…
> +++ b/include/linux/regmap.h
…
> @@ -122,26 +123,10 @@ struct reg_sequence {
> */
> #define regmap_read_poll_timeout(map, addr, val, cond, sleep_us, timeout_us) \
> ({ \
…
> + int __ret, __tmp; \
> + __tmp = read_poll_timeout(regmap_read, __ret, __ret || (cond), \
> + sleep_us, timeout_us, false, (map), (addr), &(val)); \
> + __ret ?: __tmp; \
> })
* Can this macro work also with variable names which do not contain
double underscores?
* Can the tag “Fixes” be relevant for such an adjustment?
Regards,
Markus
