On Tue, 11 May 2010 07:59:19 -0700
Jesse Barnes <jbar...@virtuousgeek.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 10 May 2010 22:00:46 -0400
> Andrew Morton <a...@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> > > +#define thm_readb(off) readb(ips->regmap + (off))
> > > +#define thm_readw(off) readw(ips->regmap + (off))
> > > +#define thm_readl(off) readl(ips->regmap + (off))
> > > +#define thm_readq(off) readq(ips->regmap + (off))
> > > +
> > > +#define thm_writeb(off, val) writeb((val), ips->regmap + (off))
> > > +#define thm_writew(off, val) writew((val), ips->regmap + (off))
> > > +#define thm_writel(off, val) writel((val), ips->regmap + (off))
> >
> > ick.
> >
> > static inline unsigned short thm_readw(struct ips_driver *ips, unsigned
> > offset)
> > {
> > readw(ips->regmap + offset);
> > }
> >
> > would be nicer.
>
> Yes, it would.
No, I take that back, it just means more typing. This idiom of
expecting a given variable to be declared for the IO routines to work
is pretty common in drivers, and saves a bunch of redundant "(ips,"
everywhere...
> > afacit these messages might come out at one-per-five-seconds max?
> >
> > I bet the driver blows up and someone's logs get spammed ;)
>
> Possibly. :) I added these at the request of Pavel; I could make them
> just print one time though...
These should be dev_warn instead anyway.
Updated patch on its way.
--
Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
