From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <trini@kernel.crashing.org>
Received: from fed1rmmtao03.cox.net (fed1rmmtao03.cox.net [68.230.241.36])
	by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F97D2BDD3
	for <linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org>;
	Sat,  9 Oct 2004 01:46:37 +1000 (EST)
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 08:46:31 -0700
From: Tom Rini <trini@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Dan Malek <dan@embeddededge.com>
Message-ID: <20041008154631.GA14773@smtp.west.cox.net>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.60.0410080840520.6091@dell.enoriver.com>
	<7D7D70F5-193F-11D9-9299-003065F9B7DC@embeddededge.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
In-Reply-To: <7D7D70F5-193F-11D9-9299-003065F9B7DC@embeddededge.com>
Cc: Embedded PPC Linux list <linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: next pass of cleaning up micropatch.c
List-Id: Linux on Embedded PowerPC Developers Mail List
	<linuxppc-embedded.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-embedded>,
	<mailto:linuxppc-embedded-request@ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-embedded>
List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-embedded-request@ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-embedded>,
	<mailto:linuxppc-embedded-request@ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>

On Fri, Oct 08, 2004 at 11:34:06AM -0400, Dan Malek wrote:
> On Oct 8, 2004, at 8:44 AM, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> >+ *  Shortcut macros for patching code.
> >  */
> >+
> >+#define PATCH2000 \
> >+	dp = (uint *)(commproc->cp_dpmem); \
> >+	for (i=0; i<(sizeof(patch_2000)/4); i++) \
> >+		*dp++ = patch_2000[i];
> >+
> >+#define PATCH2E00 \
> >+	dp = (uint *)&(commproc->cp_dpmem[0x0e00]); \
> >+	for (i=0; i<(sizeof(patch_2e00)/4); i++) \
> >+		*dp++ = patch_2e00[i];
> >+
> >+#define PATCH2F00 \
> >+	dp = (uint *)&(commproc->cp_dpmem[0x0f00]); \
> >+	for (i=0; i<(sizeof(patch_2f00)/4); i++) \
> >+		*dp++ = patch_2f00[i];
> 
> Please get rid of these macros and place the code where it
> belongs.  They add no value and just make it harder to
> read the code and understand what it does.

I agree.  If there were more patches it might make sense to write a
do_microcode_patch2(N) macro, but PATCH2NNN isn't "readable" and it's
only 3 patches.

-- 
Tom Rini
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/