On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 02:26:31PM +0200, Sakari Ailus wrote: > On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 01:45:10PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > Regarding the width-specific versions of the helpers, I really think > > encoding the size in the register macros is the best option. It makes > > life easier for driver authors (only one function to call, no need to > > think about the register width to pick the appropriate function in each > > call) and reviewers (same reason), without any drawback in my opinion. > > As I noted previously, this works well for drivers that need to access > registers with multiple widths, which indeed applies to the vast majority > of camera sensor drivers, but not to e.g. flash or lens VCM drivers. Fixed > width registers are better served with a width-specific function. But these > can be always added later on. Again, we can extend regmap to have something like int (*reg_width)(regmap *, offset) callback added that will tell the regmap bus underneath what size to use. In the driver one will define the respective method to return these widths. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
