On Fri, Sep 09, 2022 at 12:53:04PM +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote: > On 07. 09. 22, 16:56, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 7, 2022, at 3:52 PM, Russell King (Oracle) wrote: > > > On Wed, Sep 07, 2022 at 02:36:37PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > > > > Of course, it would have been nicer to see the definition of this > > > macro, because then we can understand what the "ch" argument is to > > > this macro, and how that relates to the macro argument that is > > > shown in the example as a writel(). > > > > I pulled out the 'ch' variable from the macro to avoid having > > the macro define local variables that are then passed to the > > inner expressions. > > Note that I had "port" and "ch" as a part of the macro parameters in [v2], > but it didn't help the situation much. > > > Maybe a more complete example would help clear up the confusion? > > > Arnd? > > > > Here is a patch on top of the series that would implement the > > uart_port_tx_helper_limited() and uart_port_tx_helper() > > macros that can be used directly from drivers in place of defining > > local functions, with the (alphabetically) first two drivers > > converted to that. > > If there are no objections, I will push the patches this directorin. I like > this more than [v2] or [v3] (the helper macros). Actually, I mentioned this > wait_event() style in [v1], but I perhaps simplified the concept too much to > completely eliminate the need of a wrapper function. And that made it too > complicated/too hard to understand. > > Except I'd drop the "_helper" part from the name. Originally (in [v1]), I > had uart_port_tx() and uart_port_tx_limited() functions. In [v2+v3], I added > _helper to avoid confusion as we were generating a helpers using the macros. > Yes, technically, uart_port_tx() is still a helper, but I think it's > superfluous to have it in the name now. No objection from me, thanks for doing this work! greg k-h
