Re: Increasing the maximum message size

[Abel Vesa <abel.vesa@linaro.org>]

On 22-07-23 23:43:09, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> Quoting Konrad Dybcio (2022-07-23 04:44:32)
> > Hi,
> >
> > when sending new clock drivers for Qualcomm SoCs I've been repeatedly
> > getting a bounce with a reason of "too long (>100000 characters)". The
> > drivers are pretty big for one email, for example gcc-sc8280xp.c has
> > 201071 chars, but it only makes sense to add them big-as-they-are,
> > because there are simply so many clocks, each of which needs to be
> > defined as a struct with its properties set correctly.
>
> Maybe it's time to collapse the structs into macro definitions.
> Probably a decade ago I expanded the macros that we had because we kept
> modifying the struct members while settling on something that described
> the clks. Now it doesn't seem very useful to do that because the structs
> almost never change. Certainly the struct members aren't changing
> rapidly. I'd start with a macro for branches, rcgs, and plls and see how
> small it can become. Hopefully there aren't many parameters to the macro
> so that it is still somewhat readable.

Actually, I was working on this and have something ready to be sent. I
started with sdm845 couple of weeks ago. I'll send it today as RFC. We
can continue with other platforms once that has been accepted, if that
is OK for everyone.