On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 5:54 PM, Jean Delvare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 17:39:50 +0800, eric miao wrote:
>> >
>> > Oh, and one more thing as I just notice it:
>> >
>> >> +static inline int is_group_a(struct max732x_chip *chip, unsigned off)
>> >> +{
>> >> + return (1u << off) & chip->mask_group_a;
>> >> +}
>> >
>> > Given the way you use it, can't you just define this function as:
>> >
>> > static inline int is_group_a(struct max732x_chip *chip, unsigned off)
>> > {
>> > return (off < 8);
>> > }
>> >
>> > ? As this is the only place where you use chip->mask_group_a, you would
>> > be able to get rid of it.
>> >
>>
>> I want to get rid of it either but I'm afraid not. (off < 8) doesn't
>> necessarily
>> mean it's in group_a, max7320 is an exception.
>
> I didn't look into the details (and won't have the time to) but my
> feeling is that it only depends on how you decide to handle the
> max7320. If you want to make it fit with the rest of the supported
> chips, I see no reason why it wouldn't work.
That's possible, but I really want to keep it generic enough, so that
user has the freedom to define arbitrary combinitions of
GROUP_A(XXX) | GROUP_B(XXX).
>
> --
> Jean Delvare
>
--
Cheers
- eric
_______________________________________________
i2c mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/i2c
