All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
To: micky_ching@realsil.com.cn
Cc: sameo@linux.intel.com, devel@linuxdriverproject.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
	wei_wang@realsil.com.cn, rogerable@realtek.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] mfd: rtsx: reduce code duplication in rtl8411
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 14:58:40 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131115145840.GC4996@lee--X1> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8ce8175c28355c0d69c3ac4825d3dce6c00fc2ba.1384503048.git.micky_ching@realsil.com.cn>

> From: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
> 
> in order to remove duplicated code in rtl8411, we make 8411 as the base
> init params, and other like-8411 chips will just change the different
> value with 8411, this can save some source code.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
> Signed-off-by: Micky Ching <micky_ching@realsil.com.cn>

It's not good etiquette to send patches 'From:' and 'Signed-off-by:' a
person when they are neither from or signed-off by that person.

It's much better practice to reply to the original patches with
comments placed directly under the code you wish to reference.

<snip>

> -void rtl8411b_init_params(struct rtsx_pcr *pcr)
> +void rtl8411_init_params(struct rtsx_pcr *pcr)
>  {
> -	pcr->extra_caps = EXTRA_CAPS_SD_SDR50 | EXTRA_CAPS_SD_SDR104;
> -	pcr->num_slots = 2;
> -	pcr->ops = &rtl8411b_pcr_ops;
> -
> -	pcr->flags = 0;
> -	pcr->card_drive_sel = RTL8411_CARD_DRIVE_DEFAULT;
> -	pcr->sd30_drive_sel_1v8 = DRIVER_TYPE_B;
> -	pcr->sd30_drive_sel_3v3 = DRIVER_TYPE_D;
> -	pcr->aspm_en = ASPM_L1_EN;

> -	pcr->tx_initial_phase = SET_CLOCK_PHASE(23, 7, 14);
> -	pcr->rx_initial_phase = SET_CLOCK_PHASE(4, 3, 10);

So what happened to these?

> -	pcr->ic_version = rtl8411_get_ic_version(pcr);
> +	/* rtl8411 params */
> +	rtl8411_init_base_params(pcr);
> +	set_pull_ctrl_tables(rtl8411);
> +
> +	/* different with rtl8411 */
> +	switch (PCI_PID(pcr)) {
> +	case 0x5287:
> +		rtl8411_pcr_ops.fetch_vendor_settings =
> +			rtl8411b_fetch_vendor_settings;
> +		rtl8411_pcr_ops.extra_init_hw = rtl8411b_extra_init_hw;
> +
> +		if (rtl8411b_is_qfn48(pcr))
> +			set_pull_ctrl_tables(rtl8411b_qfn48);
> +		else
> +			set_pull_ctrl_tables(rtl8411b_qfn64);

I'm not a big fan of this.

<snip>

> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/rtsx_pcr.c b/drivers/mfd/rtsx_pcr.c
> index 11e20af..ecc6852 100644
> --- a/drivers/mfd/rtsx_pcr.c
> +++ b/drivers/mfd/rtsx_pcr.c
> @@ -1046,10 +1046,6 @@ static int rtsx_pci_init_chip(struct rtsx_pcr *pcr)
>  		rts5229_init_params(pcr);
>  		break;
>  
> -	case 0x5289:
> -		rtl8411_init_params(pcr);
> -		break;
> -
>  	case 0x5227:
>  		rts5227_init_params(pcr);
>  		break;
> @@ -1059,7 +1055,8 @@ static int rtsx_pci_init_chip(struct rtsx_pcr *pcr)
>  		break;
>  
>  	case 0x5287:
> -		rtl8411b_init_params(pcr);
> +	case 0x5289:
> +		rtl8411_init_params(pcr);
>  		break;
>  	}

I see where you're going with this, but my personal opinion is that it
looks neater and more readable set out as two separate init functions.

> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/rtsx_pcr.h b/drivers/mfd/rtsx_pcr.h
> index 947e79b..dd435d7 100644
> --- a/drivers/mfd/rtsx_pcr.h
> +++ b/drivers/mfd/rtsx_pcr.h
> @@ -32,7 +32,6 @@ void rts5229_init_params(struct rtsx_pcr *pcr);
>  void rtl8411_init_params(struct rtsx_pcr *pcr);
>  void rts5227_init_params(struct rtsx_pcr *pcr);
>  void rts5249_init_params(struct rtsx_pcr *pcr);
> -void rtl8411b_init_params(struct rtsx_pcr *pcr);
>  
>  static inline u8 map_sd_drive(int idx)
>  {
> @@ -63,4 +62,12 @@ static inline u8 map_sd_drive(int idx)
>  #define rtl8411_reg_to_sd30_drive_sel_3v3(reg)	(((reg) >> 5) & 0x07)
>  #define rtl8411b_reg_to_sd30_drive_sel_3v3(reg)	((reg) & 0x03)
>  
> +#define set_pull_ctrl_tables(__device)				\
> +do {								\
> +	pcr->sd_pull_ctl_enable_tbl  = __device##_sd_pull_ctl_enable_tbl;  \
> +	pcr->sd_pull_ctl_disable_tbl = __device##_sd_pull_ctl_disable_tbl; \
> +	pcr->ms_pull_ctl_enable_tbl  = __device##_ms_pull_ctl_enable_tbl;  \
> +	pcr->ms_pull_ctl_disable_tbl = __device##_ms_pull_ctl_disable_tbl; \
> +} while (0)

Great spot Micky. I'll fix this up and resend.

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog

  reply	other threads:[~2013-11-15 14:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-11-15  8:34 [PATCH 0/3] mfd: rtsx: Decrease driver size and add new device micky_ching
2013-11-15  8:34 ` [PATCH 1/3] mfd: rtsx: reduce code duplication in rtl8411 micky_ching
2013-11-15 14:58   ` Lee Jones [this message]
2013-11-15  8:34 ` [PATCH 2/3] mfd: rtsx: add card reader rtl8402 micky_ching
2013-11-15 16:22   ` Lee Jones
2013-11-15  8:34 ` [PATCH 3/3] mfd: rtsx: Prevent 'used uninitialised' warnings micky_ching
2013-11-15 15:02   ` Lee Jones

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20131115145840.GC4996@lee--X1 \
    --to=lee.jones@linaro.org \
    --cc=devel@linuxdriverproject.org \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=micky_ching@realsil.com.cn \
    --cc=rogerable@realtek.com \
    --cc=sameo@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=wei_wang@realsil.com.cn \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.