From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 339F02D0601 for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2026 09:47:14 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.17 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1777024036; cv=none; b=UcDvN/WHFmvIRNdGrMWeVSu8v73mg8M3LMCDWpVJB5KYdP6fAIms+piBo2CevWi9TZOBj++4xWyJRKSUz+QOExmIT5xvT5i719QysXxHqnV6MB7acMLHk9ZdwtKuF1RlqLnZmu++2wC6/K07dwamaeTiJxq8PS8aaIwYjIOyn78= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1777024036; c=relaxed/simple; bh=aPZVVYExj8rGj87x79G1gLFlc2CTnEiwGYRXX2rdONg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=ilh5CdNCQv9XuVUdvSGzjCE38nVHqOV+8sA8VnqfHgjg3MNJmyl3GVLy/lpUbJSXETv1cBGBn5XIgqaHbAYy3XiT9/GyBXK1zmZGPqvXBkW0I3f3gjeoHqYvwxqY7PlXNSBu348UKE2Bpeay3MHppTO+q2L4LqJvuWojZyu56aI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=O+R98wwJ; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.17 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="O+R98wwJ" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1777024035; x=1808560035; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=aPZVVYExj8rGj87x79G1gLFlc2CTnEiwGYRXX2rdONg=; b=O+R98wwJRIUYpq3w+bATkte7vBKdvOLKbI849eRDygaYZK+chaZWkB/R 97ROtJH38Y9ktUp9ERxxAFhC0uSWMuEfO6mg74SMtS+yA6U1ExEn9cV7f UlOBYFggArZonmTrVtUDqbmvXfrQcELyNqbLuFLEosofLscYbCYdnhBwA dbTZx3OyBv87jdvde/avYMGYiyYAbprf7rTHHFA8G7Jim1dF/sVqu9DTm POtRIg5lvI0sxZtBWiGyEJwrZjlY2Wg5+skLxyz4WXBx8dV+hfnVNicOY Dv32Q99qlg8us/dGPOmwNNqNXVDjKBiGYnZFPS84VADuOUXYf7KP5MRWQ g==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: sJIaVbWlTq6Go2jBZEdQlg== X-CSE-MsgGUID: QuK+y5cZTN+cxiSVxWUhCQ== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6800,10657,11765"; a="77989077" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.23,196,1770624000"; d="scan'208";a="77989077" Received: from fmviesa005.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.145]) by orvoesa109.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 24 Apr 2026 02:47:14 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: scq+gQnQRFyvh1xiinS6CA== X-CSE-MsgGUID: B2qnFBHfQpmKXHizg2k0GA== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.23,196,1770624000"; d="scan'208";a="237912542" Received: from pgcooper-mobl3.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.245.245.71]) by fmviesa005-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 24 Apr 2026 02:47:12 -0700 Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2026 12:47:10 +0300 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Alexandru Hossu Cc: andy@kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-staging@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: fbtft: fbtft-bus: replace function-defining macro with concrete functions Message-ID: References: <20260424092818.3322248-1-hossu.alexandru@gmail.com> <69eb3b01.5d0a0220.3c3ebd.f35b@mx.google.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-staging@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <69eb3b01.5d0a0220.3c3ebd.f35b@mx.google.com> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - c/o Alberga Business Park, 6 krs, Bertel Jungin Aukio 5, 02600 Espoo On Fri, Apr 24, 2026 at 09:40:48AM -0000, Alexandru Hossu wrote: > On Fri, Apr 24, 2026 at 12:38:45PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > I'm not sure this patch improves the code. What I see it's harder to follow. > > NAK. > > Fair point. Three near-identical functions hide the pattern the macro > makes explicit. I'll drop this approach. > > If there's appetite for a minimal fix, I can send a v2 that moves > EXPORT_SYMBOL() outside the macro body only, leaving the function > definition untouched. Otherwise I'll leave it as-is and wait for > Greg's take. You can try that, as I said it would be a compromise because at least I agree with the awkwardness of having EXPORT_*() be hidden by the macro. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko