From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: b-cousson@ti.com (Cousson, Benoit) Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 16:54:05 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] [RFC] OMAP4: clock: shrink clock data utilizing preprocessor. In-Reply-To: References: <1305247077-15927-1-git-send-email-vzapolskiy@gmail.com> <20110513113013.GP31483@atomide.com> <4DCD2260.4090806@ti.com> <20110513130441.GH5323@atomide.com> <87aaeq3fmt.fsf@ti.com> Message-ID: <4DCD460D.2000100@ti.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 5/13/2011 4:48 PM, Premi, Sanjeev wrote: >> From: linux-omap-owner at vger.kernel.org >> [mailto:linux-omap-owner at vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Hilman, Kevin >> Sent: Friday, May 13, 2011 6:46 PM >> To: Tony Lindgren >> Cc: Cousson, Benoit; Vladimir Zapolskiy; Paul Walmsley; >> linux-omap at vger.kernel.org; linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org >> Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RFC] OMAP4: clock: shrink clock data >> utilizing preprocessor. >> >> Tony Lindgren writes: >> >>> * Cousson, Benoit [110513 15:18]: >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Vladimir Zapolskiy >>>>>> >>>>> Unfortunately I don't have an automated tool, but that >> would be great >>>>> to have such a script. For this time I've checked the >> correctness of the >>>>> change comparing the preprocessed output. >>>> >>>> In fact these files are already generated automatically, as written >>>> in the header file. So changing the output format should >>>> straightforward. At least for OMAP4... OMAP2 and OMAP3 were done >>>> manually some time ago. >>> >>> Sounds like the important thing to consider here is how these macros >>> should be set up considering the upcoming generic clock framework >>> and device tree changes. >>> >>> So let's wait a few days for comments from Benoit and Paul on the >>> format for the macros so we don't need to redo them again later. >>> Of course there might be other things to consider too.. >> >> ... like readability. >> >> After seeing the patch (thanks Benoit), I think this is bad tradeoff >> between readability and lines-of-code. >> >> Personally, I don't think we should be trading readability >> for diffstat >> goodness. I have a strong dislike for these multi-line macros, but >> it's up to Paul/Benoit to decide how this should look. > > [sp] Was the patch posted again? The patch size is > 100k, so it will be rejected by most mailing list. I've just sent you the patch directly. Regards, Benoit