On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 1:15 PM Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> To be able to better support different mmci variants, we need to be able to
> use variant specific callbacks, rather than continue to sprinkle the code
> with additional variant data. To move in this direction, let's add an
> optional ->init() callback to the variant data struct, which variants shall
> use to assign the mmci_host_ops pointer.
>
> Using an ->init() callback enables us to partition the code between
> different files. To allow separate mmci variant files to implement the
> variant specifics, let's also move the definition of the struct
> variant_data to the common mmci header file.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx>
Good idea!
> + if (variant->init)
> + variant->init(host);
(...)
> +struct variant_data {
(...)
> + void (*init)(struct mmci_host *host);
> +};
> +
> +/* mmci variant callbacks */
> +struct mmci_host_ops {
> +};
Why not have the .init() callback inside the struct mmci_host_ops vtable?
If you think it's hairy to dereference twice like mmci->variant->ops(foo)
you can always copy the pointer mmci->ops = variant->ops and
be done with it.
It's easy to just assign it directly in the variant data that way:
variant_foo = {
(...)
.ops = {
.init = ...
Yours,
Linus Walleij
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
