Re: [PATCHv2 1/4] ASoC: simple-card: add asoc_simple_card_fmt_master() to simplify the code.

[Jyri Sarha <jsarha@ti.com>]

On 09/02/2014 02:09 PM, Jean-Francois Moine wrote:
> On Tue, 02 Sep 2014 16:12:40 +0530
> Varka Bhadram <varkabhadram@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>> +	switch (((np == bitclkmaster) << 4) | (np == framemaster)) {
>>>>> +	case 0x11:
>>>>> +		return SND_SOC_DAIFMT_CBS_CFS;
>>>>> +	case 0x10:
>>>>> +		return SND_SOC_DAIFMT_CBS_CFM;
>>>>> +	case 0x01:
>>>>> +		return SND_SOC_DAIFMT_CBM_CFS;
>>>>> +	default:
>>>>> +		return SND_SOC_DAIFMT_CBM_CFM;
>>>>> +	}
>>>>> +
>>>>> +	/* Shouldn't be here */
>>>>> +	return -EINVAL;
>>>>> +}
>>>> It will be nice if we declare the switch case numbers as macros (specific name)...
>>> I don't see which macros: the values are just 2 booleans.
>>>
>> I am talking about 0x11, 0x10, 0x01 values.. We can give any understandable
>> names to those...?
>
> #define TRUE_TRUE 0x11
> #define TRUE_FALSE 0x10
> #define FALSE_TRUE 0x01
>
> or
>
> 	case ((TRUE << 4) | TRUE:
> 		...
> 	case ((TRUE << 4) | FALSE:
> 		...
> 	case ((FALSE << 4) | TRUE:
> 		...
>

I would vote for this. Even over the options suggested by Takashi, but 
then again this really a matter of taste.

The fact that frame and bit-clock master boolean values are bundled into 
a single "enum" field, instead of two dedicated bits, makes all options 
bit inconvenient.

Best regards,
Jyri