"David S. Miller" wrote:
> There is a school of thought which believes that:
> 
> struct xdev_regs {
>         u32 reg1;
>         u32 reg2;
> };
> 
>         val = readl(&regs->reg2);
> 
> is cleaner than:
> 
> #define REG1 0x00
> #define REG2 0x04
> 
>         val = readl(regs + REG2);
> 
> I'm personally ambivalent and believe that both cases should be allowed.

Agreed...  Tangent a bit, I wanted to plug using macros which IMHO make
code even more readable:

        val = RTL_R32(REG2);
        RTL_W32(REG2, val);

Since these are driver-private, if you are only dealing with one chip
you could even shorten things to "R32" and "W32", if that doesn't offend
any sensibilities :)

-- 
Jeff Garzik      | Game called on account of naked chick
Building 1024    |
MandrakeSoft     |
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to