From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Wolfgang Grandegger Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] add the driver for Analog Devices Blackfin on-chip CAN controllers Date: Wed, 09 Dec 2009 20:50:47 +0100 Message-ID: <4B1FFF97.8040005@grandegger.com> References: <1260353277-30902-1-git-send-email-21cnbao@gmail.com> <4B1F790C.2060201@grandegger.com> <3c17e3570912090431o4daaab7cwfee25df4cb0774c2@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: socketcan-core-0fE9KPoRgkgATYTw5x5z8w@public.gmane.org, uclinux-dist-devel-ZG0+EudsQA8dtHy/vicBwGD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org, davem-fT/PcQaiUtIeIZ0/mPfg9Q@public.gmane.org, "H.J. Oertel" , netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Barry Song <21cnbao-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> Return-path: In-Reply-To: <3c17e3570912090431o4daaab7cwfee25df4cb0774c2-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: socketcan-core-bounces-0fE9KPoRgkgATYTw5x5z8w@public.gmane.org Errors-To: socketcan-core-bounces-0fE9KPoRgkgATYTw5x5z8w@public.gmane.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Barry Song wrote: > On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 6:16 PM, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: >> Barry Song wrote: >>> Signed-off-by: Barry Song <21cnbao-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> >>> Signed-off-by: H.J. Oertel >>> --- >>> -v2: cleanup according to Wolfgang Grandegger's feedback >>> 1.delete some unnecessary debug print >>> 2.delete ndo_tx_timeout entry as it is not needed in can >>> 3.use alloc_can_skb, alloc_can_err_skb instead of netdev_alloc_skb >>> 4.add timeout while polling can status >>> 5.rename BFIN_CAN_READ/WRITE_MSG to bfin_can_read/write_data >>> 6.use kernel BIT instead of bit shift >>> 7.use void __iomem * for CAN memory base memory instead of u32 >>> 8.delete "dev->last_rx = jiffies" since it is not needed now >>> 9.delete redundant "echo_skb" member in bfin can private data >>> 10.follow can convention to use "_" instead of "-" for file names >> Did you consider using structs instead of these ugly and cumbersome >> macro functions? This was my major criticisms with your previous version >> of the patch. > Wolfgang, > I considered using the structures to describe registers, and I > completely agree with you about the advantages of structures. And I am > sure I will move to structures after some time and send a patch for > it. But for the moment, it is not too urgent, so I only fixed all your > other comments. Anyway, if you insist on using structures in just this > patch, I can fix and send the -v3 patch after finishing it. Well, "it's not too urgent" is not a real argument for me, sorry. As Marc pointed out, the current "#define's" are not acceptable, anyway. Please invest time in moving to structs right a way. Thanks, Wolfgang.