Re: [PATCH] media: em28xx-video - change em28xx_scaler_set() to use em28xx_reg_len()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 03/22/2014 06:32 AM, Frank Schäfer wrote:

Am 21.03.2014 22:04, schrieb Shuah Khan:
Change em28xx_scaler_set() to use em28xx_reg_len() to get register
lengths for EM28XX_R30_HSCALELOW and EM28XX_R32_VSCALELOW registers,
instead of hard-coding the length. Moved em28xx_reg_len() definition
for it to be visible to em28xx_scaler_set().

Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <shuah.kh@xxxxxxxxxxx>
---
  drivers/media/usb/em28xx/em28xx-video.c |   29 ++++++++++++++++-------------
  1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/media/usb/em28xx/em28xx-video.c b/drivers/media/usb/em28xx/em28xx-video.c
index 19af6b3..f8a91de 100644
--- a/drivers/media/usb/em28xx/em28xx-video.c
+++ b/drivers/media/usb/em28xx/em28xx-video.c
@@ -272,6 +272,18 @@ static void em28xx_capture_area_set(struct em28xx *dev, u8 hstart, u8 vstart,
  	}
  }

+static int em28xx_reg_len(int reg)
+{
+	switch (reg) {
+	case EM28XX_R40_AC97LSB:
+	case EM28XX_R30_HSCALELOW:
+	case EM28XX_R32_VSCALELOW:
+		return 2;
+	default:
+		return 1;
+	}
+}
+
  static int em28xx_scaler_set(struct em28xx *dev, u16 h, u16 v)
  {
  	u8 mode;
@@ -284,11 +296,13 @@ static int em28xx_scaler_set(struct em28xx *dev, u16 h, u16 v)

  		buf[0] = h;
  		buf[1] = h >> 8;
-		em28xx_write_regs(dev, EM28XX_R30_HSCALELOW, (char *)buf, 2);
+		em28xx_write_regs(dev, EM28XX_R30_HSCALELOW, (char *)buf,
+				  em28xx_reg_len(EM28XX_R30_HSCALELOW));

  		buf[0] = v;
  		buf[1] = v >> 8;
-		em28xx_write_regs(dev, EM28XX_R32_VSCALELOW, (char *)buf, 2);
+		em28xx_write_regs(dev, EM28XX_R32_VSCALELOW, (char *)buf,
+				  em28xx_reg_len(EM28XX_R32_VSCALELOW));
Hmm... registers 0x30 and 0x32 are always 2 bytes long.
So this change would needlessly complicate the code.


The reason I made the change is that em28xx_reg_len() is handling these two registers and I thought it would be good to make it consistent with other writes to these registers and not hard-code the length.

I think it would help with maintenance later by avoiding hard-coding the length and use the existing routine that returns the length for these registers.

You are correct that it does add a function call in the code path. So if you think the trade-off isn't worth it, I am not going to argue with it :)

-- Shuah

--
Shuah Khan
Senior Linux Kernel Developer - Open Source Group
Samsung Research America(Silicon Valley)
shuah.kh@xxxxxxxxxxx | (970) 672-0658
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Input]     [Video for Linux]     [Gstreamer Embedded]     [Mplayer Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [Yosemite Backpacking]
  Powered by Linux