lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Oct]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC] pwm: chip_data vs device_data
On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 09:20:53AM +0200, Olliver Schinagl wrote:
> Hey Thierry, list,
>
> While working on something in the pwm framework, I noticed that the void
> *data in the pwm_device struct is called chip_data. Why is it not called
> device_data, since it is the data associated with a PWM device, rather then
> the chip, and on that note, if it really is chip related data (thus covering
> the whole chip, not just the single pwm device) why is there no chip_data in
> pwm_chip?

The reason for the name is that it's chip-specific data associated with
a struct pwm_device. That is, a PWM chip implementation (i.e. driver)
can use it to keep per-PWM data that's not in struct pwm_device itself.

> Again, is this something worth my time to add a device_data and rename
> chip_data?

device_data would be redundant because it's already part of struct
pwm_device. Plain data might be okay, but I like the chip_ prefix
because it marks the data as being chip-specific data rather than
generic.

Thierry
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-10-06 10:01    [W:0.195 / U:0.064 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site