From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: dwalker@codeaurora.org (Daniel Walker)
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2011 13:03:05 -0800
Subject: [PATCH 2/3] msm: iommu: Generalize platform data for multiple
	targets
In-Reply-To: <4D55A372.9090705@codeaurora.org>
References: <1297456098-3241-1-git-send-email-stepanm@codeaurora.org>
	<1297456098-3241-2-git-send-email-stepanm@codeaurora.org>
	<1297456934.4852.11.camel@m0nster>  <4D55A16A.7030300@codeaurora.org>
	<1297457899.4852.14.camel@m0nster>  <4D55A372.9090705@codeaurora.org>
Message-ID: <1297458185.4852.15.camel@m0nster>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Fri, 2011-02-11 at 13:00 -0800, Steve Muckle wrote:
> On 02/11/11 12:58, Daniel Walker wrote:
> > On Fri, 2011-02-11 at 12:51 -0800, Steve Muckle wrote:
> >> On 02/11/11 12:42, Daniel Walker wrote:
> >>>>  static struct resource msm_iommu_jpegd_resources[] = {
> >>>>  	{
> >>>> -		.start = MSM_IOMMU_JPEGD_PHYS,
> >>>> -		.end   = MSM_IOMMU_JPEGD_PHYS + MSM_IOMMU_JPEGD_SIZE - 1,
> >>>> +		.start = 0x07300000,
> >>>> +		.end   = 0x07300000 + SZ_1M - 1,
> >>>
> >>> Looks worse .. Just put the macros into a static header file for both.
> >>
> >> Why bother defining macros for these if they only appear here? I don't
> >> think that adds any value or readability - these addresses are clearly
> >> the physical area for the msm_iommu_jpegd. It just makes it more
> >> annoying to have to look up the values in a separate file if you are
> >> wondering what they are.
> > 
> > So your saying if you look at the number 0x07300000 you instantly know
> > that this JPEGD?
> 
> Yes, because it's the start address for the msm_iommu_jpegd resource.

Yeah I guess that's true .. I still think it's better design not to do
it this way.

Daniel

-- 
Sent by an consultant of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora
Forum.