On Wed, Apr 06, 2022 at 02:13:46PM +0200, Miquel Raynal wrote: > andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote on Wed, 6 Apr 2022 11:59:05 > +0300: > > On Wed, Apr 06, 2022 at 09:49:08AM +0200, Miquel Raynal wrote: > > > andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote on Tue, 5 Apr 2022 17:50:57 > > > +0300: > > > > On Tue, Apr 05, 2022 at 10:19:07AM +0200, Miquel Raynal wrote: ... > > > > > +#define RZN1_DMAMUX_SPLIT 16 > > > > > > > > I would name it more explicitly: > > > > > > > > #define RZN1_DMAMUX_SPLIT_1_0 16 > > > > > > I am sorry but I don't understand this suffix, which probably means > > > that it is not as clear as we wish. Do you mind if I stick to > > > RZN1_DMAMUX_SPLIT? > > > > The suffix to show that this is the value between part 0 (indexed by 0) and > > part 1 (indexed by 1) as far as I can see they are different by size. Since > > they are not equal, the original name without suffix is confusing (I would > > expect indexing up to 4 in such case). > > They are equivalent in size (0-15/16-31), or aren't we talking about the > same thing? Hmm... I have misread something then. To clarify that the portions are equal perhaps we can name it MAX_LINES or so instead of SPLIT? -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
