From: "Marek Behún" <kabel@kernel.org>
To: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org,
Hayes Wang <hayeswang@realtek.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/5] r8152: add MCU typed read/write functions
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 10:54:18 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201105105418.555d6e54@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201104121424.th4v6b3ucjhro5d3@skbuf>
On Wed, 4 Nov 2020 14:14:24 +0200
Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 12:10:53PM +0100, Marek Behún wrote:
> > > I'm not sure it's worth the change :(
> > > Let's put it another way, your diffstat has 338 insertions and 335
> > > deletions. Aka you're saving 3 lines overall.
> > > With this new approach that doesn't use token concatenation at all,
> > > you're probably not saving anything at all.
> > > Also, I'm not sure that you need to make the functions inline. The
> > > compiler should be smart enough to not generate functions for
> > > usb_ocp_read_byte etc. You can check with
> > > "make drivers/net/usb/r8152.lst".
> >
> > Vladimir, the purpose of this patch isn't to save lines, but to save us
> > from always writing MCU_TYPE_USB / MCU_TYPE_PLA.
> > It just transforms forms of
> > ocp_read_word(tp, MCU_TYPE_USB, idx);
> > ocp_write_dword(tp, MCU_TYPE_PLA, idx, val);
> > into
> > usb_ocp_read_word(tp, idx);
> > pla_ocp_write_dword(tp, idx, val);
> >
> > The fifth patch of this series saves lines by adding _modify functions,
> > to transform
> > val = *_read(idx);
> > val &= ~clr;
> > val |= set;
> > *_write(idx, val);
> > into
> > *_modify(idx, clr, set);
> >
>
> So if the point isn't to save lines, then why don't you go for something
> trivial?
>
> static void ocp_modify_byte(struct r8152 *tp, u16 type, u16 index, u8 clr,
> u8 set)
> {
> u8 val = ocp_read_byte(tp, type, index);
>
> ocp_write_byte(tp, type, index, (val & ~clr) | set);
> }
>
> static void ocp_modify_word(struct r8152 *tp, u16 type, u16 index, u16 clr,
> u16 set)
> {
> u16 val = ocp_read_word(tp, type, index);
>
> ocp_write_word(tp, type, index, (val & ~clr) | set);
> }
>
> static void ocp_modify_dword(struct r8152 *tp, u16 type, u16 index, u32 clr,
> u32 set)
> {
> u32 val = ocp_read_dword(tp, type, index);
>
> ocp_write_dword(tp, type, index, (val & ~clr) | set);
> }
>
> #define pla_ocp_read_byte(tp, index) \
> ocp_read_byte(tp, MCU_TYPE_PLA, index)
> #define pla_ocp_write_byte(tp, index, data) \
> ocp_write_byte(tp, MCU_TYPE_PLA, index, data)
> #define pla_ocp_modify_byte(tp, index, clr, set) \
> ocp_modify_byte(tp, MCU_TYPE_PLA, index, clr, set)
> #define pla_ocp_read_word(tp, index) \
> ocp_read_word(tp, MCU_TYPE_PLA, index)
> #define pla_ocp_write_word(tp, index, data) \
> ocp_write_word(tp, MCU_TYPE_PLA, index, data)
> #define pla_ocp_modify_word(tp, index, clr, set) \
> ocp_modify_word(tp, MCU_TYPE_PLA, index, clr, set)
> #define pla_ocp_read_dword(tp, index) \
> ocp_read_dword(tp, MCU_TYPE_PLA, index)
> #define pla_ocp_write_dword(tp, index, data) \
> ocp_write_dword(tp, MCU_TYPE_PLA, index, data)
> #define pla_ocp_modify_dword(tp, index, clr, set) \
> ocp_modify_dword(tp, MCU_TYPE_PLA, index, clr, set)
>
> #define usb_ocp_read_byte(tp, index) \
> ocp_read_byte(tp, MCU_TYPE_USB, index)
> #define usb_ocp_write_byte(tp, index, data) \
> ocp_write_byte(tp, MCU_TYPE_USB, index, data)
> #define usb_ocp_modify_byte(tp, index, clr, set) \
> ocp_modify_byte(tp, MCU_TYPE_USB, index, clr, set)
> #define usb_ocp_read_word(tp, index) \
> ocp_read_word(tp, MCU_TYPE_USB, index)
> #define usb_ocp_write_word(tp, index, data) \
> ocp_write_word(tp, MCU_TYPE_USB, index, data)
> #define usb_ocp_modify_word(tp, index, clr, set) \
> ocp_modify_word(tp, MCU_TYPE_USB, index, clr, set)
> #define usb_ocp_read_dword(tp, index) \
> ocp_read_dword(tp, MCU_TYPE_USB, index)
> #define usb_ocp_write_dword(tp, index, data) \
> ocp_write_dword(tp, MCU_TYPE_USB, index, data)
> #define usb_ocp_modify_dword(tp, index, clr, set) \
> ocp_modify_dword(tp, MCU_TYPE_USB, index, clr, set)
>
> To my eyes this is easier to digest.
>
> That is, unless you want to go for function pointers and have separate
> structures for PLA and USB...
I thought that static inline functions are preferred to macros, since
compiler warns better if they are used incorrectly...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-11-05 9:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-11-03 19:22 [PATCH net-next 0/5] r8152 changes Marek Behún
2020-11-03 19:22 ` [PATCH net-next 1/5] r8152: use generic USB macros to define product table Marek Behún
2020-11-04 1:57 ` Hayes Wang
2020-11-04 6:02 ` Marek Behún
2020-11-04 7:14 ` Hayes Wang
2020-11-04 8:53 ` Greg KH
2020-11-03 19:22 ` [PATCH net-next 2/5] r8152: cosmetic improvement of product table macro Marek Behún
2020-11-03 19:22 ` [PATCH net-next 3/5] r8152: add MCU typed read/write functions Marek Behún
2020-11-03 21:47 ` Vladimir Oltean
2020-11-04 5:55 ` Marek Behún
2020-11-04 8:47 ` Vladimir Oltean
2020-11-04 10:25 ` Marek Behún
2020-11-04 10:35 ` Marek Behún
2020-11-04 11:00 ` Vladimir Oltean
2020-11-04 11:10 ` Marek Behún
2020-11-04 12:14 ` Vladimir Oltean
2020-11-04 21:07 ` Jakub Kicinski
2020-11-05 9:54 ` Marek Behún [this message]
2020-11-05 10:56 ` Vladimir Oltean
2020-11-05 11:30 ` Marek Behún
2020-11-05 12:06 ` Vladimir Oltean
2020-11-06 3:01 ` Hayes Wang
2020-11-06 6:39 ` Marek Behún
2020-11-06 7:39 ` Hayes Wang
2020-11-03 19:22 ` [PATCH net-next 4/5] r8152: rename r8153_phy_status to r8153_phy_status_wait Marek Behún
2020-11-03 19:22 ` [PATCH net-next 5/5] r8152: use *_modify helpers instead of read/write combos Marek Behún
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20201105105418.555d6e54@kernel.org \
--to=kabel@kernel.org \
--cc=hayeswang@realtek.com \
--cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=olteanv@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).