From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: shawn.guo@linaro.org (Shawn Guo)
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2013 21:27:59 +0800
Subject: [PATCH 5/5] mmc: sdhci-esdhc-imx: eliminate enum imx_esdhc_type
In-Reply-To: <1381739511.4093.124.camel@weser.hi.pengutronix.de>
References: <1381739024-24924-1-git-send-email-shawn.guo@linaro.org>
 <1381739024-24924-6-git-send-email-shawn.guo@linaro.org>
 <1381739511.4093.124.camel@weser.hi.pengutronix.de>
Message-ID: <20131014132757.GF27668@S2101-09.ap.freescale.net>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 10:31:51AM +0200, Lucas Stach wrote:
> > +#define IMX25_ESDHC	(ESDHC_FLAG_NO_DMAS_BITS | ESDHC_FLAG_ENGCM07207)
> > +#define IMX35_ESDHC	(ESDHC_FLAG_ENGCM07207)
> > +#define IMX51_ESDHC	(0)
> > +#define IMX53_ESDHC	(ESDHC_FLAG_MULTIBLK_NO_INT)
> > +#define IMX6Q_USDHC	(ESDHC_FLAG_USDHC)
> >  
> This looks really nasty to me, especially with the needed void pointer
> cast you added in the previous patch.

Yes, it does, when you look at from of_device_id.data.  But keep it in
mind, that platform_device_id.driver data is type kernel_ulong_t not
void *.  So while we add a structure with the flags field in it to save
the cast on of_device_id.data, we will have to add a cast for
platform_device_id.driver.

> Can you please introduce a proper driver data struct, with the flags
> field in it? This will make this thing a lot cleaner, more future proof
> and shouldn't add any overhead in the generated code.

But I agree with you that using a data structure is more future proof,
so will do in v2.

Shawn