On Wed, 11 Apr 2012 14:37:35 +0300, Felipe Balbi <balbi@xxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 01:52:31PM +0300, Alexander Shishkin wrote:
> > On Wed, 11 Apr 2012 12:54:41 +0300, Felipe Balbi <balbi@xxxxxx> wrote:
> > > why do you need separate functions to read capability or operational
> > > registers ? They look the same. You could just define them a little
> > > differently:
> > >
> > > static u32 hw_read(void *base, u32 offset, u32 mask)
> > > {
> > > return ioread32(base + offset) & mask;
> > > }
> > >
> > > then, when calling it you can use:
> > >
> > > hw_read(hw_bank.op, ADDRESS, mask);
> > > hw_read(hw_bank.cap, ADDRESS, mask);
> >
> > That's what I've done in the "redo register access" patch. The reason I
> > didn't do this here is that I wanted to change one thing at a time. It
> > might make sense to squash these patches together, too.
>
> that patch is different. You use some extra trickery to try and guess
> which base to use (operational or capability) whereas you could just
> pass that as an argument.
Yes, I really wanted to hide all that under the hood and let the hw_*
functions deal with the register banks, it looks better to me, but I
will change it to what you're suggesting, if you think it's better like
that.
Regards,
--
Alex
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
