On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 12:31 PM, Terje Bergström <tbergstrom@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > We must've talked about a bit different things. For pure register defs, > I can accommodate changing to #defines. We'd lose the code coverage > analysis, though, but if the parentheses are a make-or-break question to > upstreaming, I can change. Out of sheer curiosity: What are you using the coverage data of these register definitions for? When I looked into coverage analysis the resulting data seemed rather useless to me, since the important thing is how well we cover the entire dynamic state space of the hw+sw (e.g. crap left behind by the bios ...) and coverage seemed to be a poor proxy for that. Hence why I wonder what you're doing with this data ... -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
