From: Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/7] spi: altera: Use struct-based register access
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 00:15:21 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201410220015.21414.marex@denx.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAD6G_RRPx96scXQYXtfyXW2mvWiDY0fgCd81NmpSneocq2qmdg@mail.gmail.com>
On Monday, October 20, 2014 at 07:19:33 PM, Jagan Teki wrote:
> On 20 October 2014 20:40, Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de> wrote:
> > On Monday, October 20, 2014 at 04:53:15 PM, Jagan Teki wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> >> > -#define ALTERA_SPI_RXDATA 0
> >> > -#define ALTERA_SPI_TXDATA 4
> >> > -#define ALTERA_SPI_STATUS 8
> >> > -#define ALTERA_SPI_CONTROL 12
> >> > -#define ALTERA_SPI_SLAVE_SEL 20
> >> > +struct altera_spi_regs {
> >> > + u32 rxdata;
> >> > + u32 txdata;
> >> > + u32 status;
> >> > + u32 control;
> >> > + u32 _reserved;
> >> > + u32 slave_sel;
> >> > +};
> >>
> >> Can you place this structure definition below of all macro defines, i
> >> don't think the
> >> next level patches does that, does they?
> >
> > Does it make sense to you, to first define the bits in registers and then
> > the register layout ? It does not make sense to me, so I would prefer to
> > keep it like it is.
>
> You're correct the way you replaced, usually the driver code will go like
> this
>
> -- >includes
>
> --> macros definitions
>
> --> global or structure definitions
>
> --> driver function calls.
>
> We follow this [1] to make the driver more readable.
>
> [1] http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/265683/
I'm not sure what I am supposed to follow in the link above. Is it fine to
assume that this patch does not need any change then ?
Best regards,
Marek Vasut
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-10-21 22:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-10-19 18:43 [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/7] spi: altera: Use struct-based register access Marek Vasut
2014-10-19 18:43 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/7] spi: altera: Clean up bit definitions Marek Vasut
2014-10-19 18:43 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/7] spi: altera: Clean up most checkpatch issues Marek Vasut
2014-10-19 18:43 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 4/7] spi: altera: Zap endless loop Marek Vasut
2014-10-20 15:03 ` Jagan Teki
2014-10-19 18:43 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 5/7] spi: altera: Clean up the use of variable d Marek Vasut
2014-10-19 18:43 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 6/7] spi: altera: Add short note about EPCS/EPCQx1 Marek Vasut
2014-10-20 15:10 ` Jagan Teki
2014-10-20 15:13 ` Marek Vasut
2014-10-20 17:27 ` Jagan Teki
2014-10-19 18:43 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 7/7] spi: altera: Move the config options to the top Marek Vasut
2014-10-20 7:36 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/7] spi: altera: Use struct-based register access Pavel Machek
2014-10-20 14:53 ` Jagan Teki
2014-10-20 15:10 ` Marek Vasut
2014-10-20 17:19 ` Jagan Teki
2014-10-21 22:15 ` Marek Vasut [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2014-10-22 19:55 Marek Vasut
2014-10-23 14:45 ` Pavel Machek
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=201410220015.21414.marex@denx.de \
--to=marex@denx.de \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
/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