lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Jun]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 01/11] i2c: add helpers for locking the I2C segment
From
Date
On 2018-06-18 13:54, Wolfram Sang wrote:
>
>>> I wonder if i2c_lock_segment() and i2c_lock_root_adapter() are really
>>> more readable and convenient than i2c_lock_bus() with the flag. I think
>>> the flags have speaking names, too.
>>>
>>> Is that an idea to remove these functions altogether and start using
>>> i2c_lock_bus()?
>>
>> That would be fine with me. I don't have a strong opinion and agree that
>> both are readable enough...
>>
>> It would make for a reduction of the number of lines so that's nice, but
>> the macro in drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-gpio.c (patch 11) would not fit in
>> the current \-width (or whatever you'd call that line of backslashes to
>> the right in a multi-line macro).
>>
>> Does anyone have a strong opinion?
>
> I have a strong opinion on making i2c.h less bloated. And yes, less
> number of lines is nice, too. I think that surely pays off the
> whitespace exception.

Ok, I have rebased onto v4.18-rc1, killed the i2c-tegra hunk and converted
i2c_lock_root(foo) over to i2c_lock_bus(foo, I2C_LOCK_ROOT_ADAPTER) and
i2c_lock_segment(foo) over to i2c_lock_bus(foo, I2C_LOCK_SEGMENT). And I
of course killed a bunch of locking helpers in i2c.h.

I doing build tests now, will post a v2 in the morning.

Cheers,
Peter

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-06-19 23:31    [W:0.175 / U:1.200 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site