Re: [PATCH] ene_ub6250: Use macros for firmware names

[Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 02:31:09PM -0600, Tim Gardner wrote:
> Advertise firmware files using MODULE_FIRMWARE macros.
> 
> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
> Cc: linux-usb@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: usb-storage@lists.one-eyed-alien.net
> Signed-off-by: Tim Gardner <tim.gardner@canonical.com>
> ---
>  drivers/usb/storage/ene_ub6250.c |   26 +++++++++++++++++++-------
>  1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/usb/storage/ene_ub6250.c b/drivers/usb/storage/ene_ub6250.c
> index b28f2ad..3fec82f 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/storage/ene_ub6250.c
> +++ b/drivers/usb/storage/ene_ub6250.c
> @@ -29,9 +29,21 @@
>  #include "protocol.h"
>  #include "debug.h"
>  
> +#define SD_INIT1_FIRMWARE "ene-ub6250/sd_init1.bin"
> +#define SD_INIT2_FIRMWARE "ene-ub6250/sd_init2.bin"
> +#define SD_RW_FIRMWARE "ene-ub6250/sd_rdwr.bin"
> +#define MS_INIT_FIRMWARE "ene-ub6250/ms_init.bin"
> +#define MSP_RW_FIRMWARE "ene-ub6250/msp_rdwr.bin"
> +#define MS_RW_FIRMWARE "ene-ub6250/ms_rdwr.bin"
> +
>  MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Driver for ENE UB6250 reader");
>  MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
> -
> +MODULE_FIRMWARE(SD_INIT1_FIRMWARE);
> +MODULE_FIRMWARE(SD_INIT2_FIRMWARE);
> +MODULE_FIRMWARE(SD_RW_FIRMWARE);
> +MODULE_FIRMWARE(MS_INIT_FIRMWARE);
> +MODULE_FIRMWARE(MSP_RW_FIRMWARE);
> +MODULE_FIRMWARE(MS_RW_FIRMWARE);

Why do you need the #defines here at all?  What's wrong with just using
the file names in the MODULE_FIRMWARE() macro directly?  That cuts the
size of the patch in half :)

thanks,

greg k-h