On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 04:16:18PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 02:08:49PM +0000, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 03:57:10PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > > Hi Sakari,
> > >
> > > Thank you for the patch.
> > >
> > > On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 03:44:57PM +0200, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > > > Separate CCS static data read-only register access in ccs-reg-access.c by
> > > > naming them differently.
> > >
> > > "naming the access functions differently"
> > >
> > > > The code in this file generally deals with reading and writing registers
> > > > where as static data (when it comes to ccs_static_read_only()) contains
> > > > the read-only register values but no hardware registers are accessed in
> > > > that case.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > > .../driver-api/media/drivers/ccs/mk-ccs-regs | 2 +-
> > > > drivers/media/i2c/ccs/ccs-reg-access.c | 20 +++++++++----------
> > > > 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/Documentation/driver-api/media/drivers/ccs/mk-ccs-regs b/Documentation/driver-api/media/drivers/ccs/mk-ccs-regs
> > > > index 01252ee6062b..3d3152b45821 100755
> > > > --- a/Documentation/driver-api/media/drivers/ccs/mk-ccs-regs
> > > > +++ b/Documentation/driver-api/media/drivers/ccs/mk-ccs-regs
> > > > @@ -136,7 +136,7 @@ if (! defined $kernel) {
> > > >
> > > > print $H "#define CCS_FL_FLOAT_IREAL " . flag_str(\$flag, \$all_flags) . "\n";
> > > > print $H "#define CCS_FL_IREAL " . flag_str(\$flag, \$all_flags) . "\n";
> > > > -print $H "#define CCS_BUILD_BUG \
> > > > +print $H "#define CCS_BUILD_BUG \\
> > >
> > > This doesn't seem related.
> >
> > Oops. This was meant to go to the previous patch. I'll address this in
> > v3...
> >
> > >
> > > > BUILD_BUG_ON(~CCI_REG_PRIVATE_MASK & ($all_flags))\n"
> > > > if defined $kernel;
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/media/i2c/ccs/ccs-reg-access.c b/drivers/media/i2c/ccs/ccs-reg-access.c
> > > > index 25993445f4fe..652d705a2ef5 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/media/i2c/ccs/ccs-reg-access.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/media/i2c/ccs/ccs-reg-access.c
> > > > @@ -197,8 +197,8 @@ static int __ccs_read_addr(struct ccs_sensor *sensor, u32 reg, u32 *val,
> > > > return 0;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > -static int __ccs_read_data(struct ccs_reg *regs, size_t num_regs,
> > > > - u32 reg, u32 *val)
> > > > +static int __ccs_static_read_only(struct ccs_reg *regs, size_t num_regs,
> > >
> > > "static read only" sounds weird when interpreting "read" as a verb. And
> > > if "read" is not a verb, you're missing a verb :-) Maybe
> > > __ccs_read_state_data() would be a better name ? Same below.
> >
> > Why state_data? I prefer to use terms used in the spec, not come up with
> > new ones.
>
> Sorry, I mean __ccs_read_static_data(). I'm working on a patch related
> to V4L2 subdev state at the moment :-)
>
> > There are also other blocks in static data beseides read-only register
> > values.
> >
> > How about ccs_static_data_read_only_reg(), would that be more informative
> > in your opinion?
>
> ccs_static_data_read_ro_reg() would work for me. I interpret
> ccs_static_data_read_only_reg() as "read just the register and nothing
> else".
ccs_static_data_read_ro_reg() seems reasonable, I'll use it in v3.
There will be more similarly named functions in the future.
--
Sakari Ailus
