On Tue, 2015-12-15 at 18:28 +0100, Florian Vallee wrote:
> +
> +/* A given spi_device can represent up to eight mcp23sxx chips
> + * sharing the same chipselect but using different addresses
> + * (e.g. chips #0 and #3 might be populated, but not #1 or $2).
> + * Driver data holds all the per-chip data.
> + */
> +struct mcp23s08_driver_data {
> + unsigned ngpio;
> + struct mcp23s08 *mcp[8];
> + struct mcp23s08 chip[];
> +};
It doesn't look like anything uses this struct.
> +static int
> +mcp23008_read_regs(struct mcp23s08 *mcp, unsigned reg, u16 *vals, unsigned n)
> +{
> + while (n--) {
> + int ret = mcp23008_read(mcp, reg++);
This could use mcp->ops->read(mcp, reg++) instead of mcp23008_read().
Which would make it exactly the same as this function:
> +static int
> +mcp23017_read_regs(struct mcp23s08 *mcp, unsigned reg, u16 *vals, unsigned n)
> +{
> + while (n--) {
> + int ret = mcp23017_read(mcp, reg++);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + return ret;
> + *vals++ = ret;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
So just one read_regs fuction is needed. Which also would allow
read_regs to be removed from the ops struct since it's the same for both
chips.
> +
> +static const struct mcp23s08_ops mcp23008_ops = {
> + .read = mcp23008_read,
> + .write = mcp23008_write,
> + .read_regs = mcp23008_read_regs,
> +};
> +
_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
