Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 05 Jun 2013 15:19:30 -0500 | From | Mark Langsdorf <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2 v2] sata highbank: add bit-banged SGPIO driver support |
| |
On 06/04/2013 03:32 PM, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, Mark. > > On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 10:09:41AM -0500, Mark Langsdorf wrote: >>> And tell ahci core sizeof(ecx_host_priv) some way, but really, just >>> having a plain pointer should be enough, I think. >> >> I think I want to do the opposite. For 90% of the AHCI EM functions, >> I want ecx_host_priv to be an ahci_host_priv so that I can use those >> functions without having to keep a local copy of them. >> >> Would something like this: >> struct ahci_host_priv { >> /* standard AHCI existing stuff */ >> void *private_data; >> }; >> >> I shied away from that because a private data structure having a private >> data structure doesn't seem right. > > Aren't we talking about the same thing? I'm perfectly fine with > adding a pointer to ahci_host_priv. Maybe you can name it slightly > differently - say, *impl_data, *platform_data, whatever.
I guess we are talking about the same thing. I'll do that.
>>>> +static ssize_t ecx_transmit_led_message(struct ata_port *ap, u32 state, >>>> + ssize_t size) >>>> +{ >>> ... >>>> + if (!hpriv->em_msg_type & EM_MSG_TYPE_LED) >>>> + return size; >>> >>> Is this really correct? You first negate and convert it to bool and >>> then bit-wise and it with a mask? How is supposed to work? >> >> Am I confused about the order of operations? It's meant to be "continue >> if hpriv->em_msg_type doesn't have EM_MSG_TYPE_LED set". > > Shouldn't that be > > if (!(hpriv->em_msg_type & EM_MSG_TYPE_LED)) > > ! has higher priority than &. You're converting em_msg_type to 1 or 0 > and then and'ing EM_MSG_TYPE_LED to it.
I'll fix it then.
--Mark Langsdorf Calxeda, Inc.
| |