Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/3] media: vimc: move private defines to a common header | From | Shuah Khan <> | Date | Mon, 12 Aug 2019 08:27:32 -0600 |
| |
On 8/12/19 8:24 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > Hi Shua, > > On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 08:19:27AM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote: >> On 8/10/19 8:14 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote: >>> On Fri, Aug 09, 2019 at 03:45:41PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote: >>>> In preparation for collapsing the component driver structure into >>>> a monolith, move private device structure defines to a new common >>>> header file. >>> >>> Apart from the vimc_device structure, this doesn't seem to be needed. >>> I'd rather keep each structure private to the .c file that handles it, >>> and only share vimc_device globally. >> >> Right. I initially thought that I needed these global. Once I completed >> the patches without needing these as global, I overlooked updating the >> patches. >> >> I will take care of that. Any thoughts on vimc.h vs. adding vimc_device >> struct to existing vimc-common.h >> >> As I explained to Helen in response to her comment about: >> >> "My thinking is that vimc-common.h is common for all the subdevs and >> putting vimc-core defines and structures it shares it with the subdev >> files can be in a separate file. >> >> It is more of design choice to keep structures and defined organized. >> Originally I was thinking all the subdev device structires need to be >> global, and my patch set I sent out as such doesn't need that. I just >> overlooked that when I sent the patches out. >> >> This reduces the number of things that need to be common, I don't really >> have any strong reasons for either choice of adding common defines to >> vimc-common.h vs vimc.h - maybe with a slight tilt towards vimc.h" > > The vimc_device structure fits nicely in vimc-common.h in my opinion, as > it's used by every component. I don't care much either way. >
Sounds good to me.
thanks, -- Shuah
| |