From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-path: <linux-media-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr ([192.134.164.82]:7382 "EHLO
	mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK)
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754490Ab2LRMgn (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-media@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 18 Dec 2012 07:36:43 -0500
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 13:36:40 +0100 (CET)
From: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>
To: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
cc: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>,
	Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@infradead.org>,
	Ryan Mallon <rmallon@gmail.com>, Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>,
	walter harms <wharms@bfs.de>, ben-linux@fluff.org,
	w.sang@pengutronix.de, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org,
	Antti Palosaari <crope@iki.fi>,
	kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, shubhrajyoti@ti.com,
	linux-media@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/13] drivers/media/tuners/e4000.c: use macros for
 i2c_msg initialization
In-Reply-To: <20121218124640.5b1e7176@endymion.delvare>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1212181335360.1993@hadrien>
References: <1349624323-15584-1-git-send-email-Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr> <1349624323-15584-3-git-send-email-Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr> <5071AEF3.6080108@bfs.de> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1210071839040.2745@localhost6.localdomain6> <5071B834.1010200@bfs.de>
 <alpine.DEB.2.02.1210071917040.2745@localhost6.localdomain6> <1349633780.15802.8.camel@joe-AO722> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1210072053550.2745@localhost6.localdomain6> <1349645970.15802.12.camel@joe-AO722> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1210072342460.2745@localhost6.localdomain6>
 <1349646718.15802.16.camel@joe-AO722> <20121007225639.364a41b4@infradead.org> <50723661.6040107@gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1210081028340.1989@hadrien> <20121009203238.63d2275f@infradead.org> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1210110836030.2010@hadrien>
 <20121218124640.5b1e7176@endymion.delvare>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-media-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-media.vger.kernel.org>



On Tue, 18 Dec 2012, Jean Delvare wrote:

> Hi Julia,
>
> On Thu, 11 Oct 2012 08:45:43 +0200 (CEST), Julia Lawall wrote:
> > I found 6 cases where there are more than 2 messages in the array.  I
> > didn't check how many cases where there are two messages but there is
> > something other than one read and one write.
> >
> > Perhaps a reasonable option would be to use
> >
> > I2C_MSG_READ
> > I2C_MSG_WRITE
> > I2C_MSG_READ_OP
> > I2C_MSG_WRITE_OP
> >
> > The last two are for the few cases where more flags are specified.  As
> > compared to the original proposal of I2C_MSG_OP, these keep the READ or
> > WRITE idea in the macro name.  The additional argument to the OP macros
> > would be or'd with the read or write (nothing to do in this case) flags as
> > appropriate.
> >
> > Mauro proposed INIT_I2C_READ_SUBADDR for the very common case where a
> > message array has one read and one write.  I think that putting one
> > I2C_MSG_READ and one I2C_MSG_WRITE in this case is readable enough, and
> > avoids the need to do something special for the cases that don't match the
> > expectations of INIT_I2C_READ_SUBADDR.
> >
> > I propose not to do anything for the moment either for sizes or for
> > message or buffer arrays that contain only one element.
>
> Please note that I resigned from my position of i2c subsystem
> maintainer, so I will not handle this. If you think this is important,
> you'll have to resubmit and Wolfram will decide what he wants to do
> about it.

OK, I had the impression that the conclusion was that the danger was
greater than the benefit.  If there is interest in it, since I think it
does make the code more readable, I can pick it up again.

julia