From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: smuckle@codeaurora.org (Steve Muckle)
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2011 13:00:34 -0800
Subject: [PATCH 2/3] msm: iommu: Generalize platform data for multiple
	targets
In-Reply-To: <1297457899.4852.14.camel@m0nster>
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>
Message-ID: <4D55A372.9090705@codeaurora.org>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

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.

thanks,
Steve

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