On Wed, 2016-09-07 at 15:37 +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> Avoid the unnecessary if-else in pca953x_read_regs() by spltting the
> routine into smaller, specialized functions and calling the right one
> via a function pointer held in struct pca953x.
>
> Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszew...@baylibre.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpio/gpio-pca953x.c | 56 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> ---------
> 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-pca953x.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-pca953x.c
> index b3020ee..018bd18 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-pca953x.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-pca953x.c
> @@ -135,6 +135,7 @@ struct pca953x_chip {
> const struct pca953x_offset *offset;
>
> int (*write_regs)(struct pca953x_chip *, int, u8 *);
> + int (*read_regs)(struct pca953x_chip *, int, u8 *);
> };
>
> static int pca953x_read_single(struct pca953x_chip *chip, int reg,
> u32 *val,
> @@ -220,24 +221,41 @@ static int pca953x_write_regs(struct
> pca953x_chip *chip, int reg, u8 *val)
> return 0;
> }
>
> -static int pca953x_read_regs(struct pca953x_chip *chip, int reg, u8
> *val)
> +static int pca953x_read_regs_8(struct pca953x_chip *chip, int reg, u8
> *val)
> {
> int ret;
>
> - if (chip->gpio_chip.ngpio <= 8) {
> - ret = i2c_smbus_read_byte_data(chip->client, reg);
> - *val = ret;
> - } else if (chip->gpio_chip.ngpio >= 24) {
> - int bank_shift = fls((chip->gpio_chip.ngpio - 1) /
> BANK_SZ);
> + ret = i2c_smbus_read_byte_data(chip->client, reg);
> + *val = ret;
It's probably of out scope of this series, but looks like
if (ret < 0)
return ret;
*val = ret;
return 0 (?);
> @@ -762,14 +780,18 @@ static int pca953x_probe(struct i2c_client
> *client,
> */
> pca953x_setup_gpio(chip, chip->driver_data & PCA_GPIO_MASK);
>
> - if (chip->gpio_chip.ngpio <= 8)
> + if (chip->gpio_chip.ngpio <= 8) {
> chip->write_regs = pca953x_write_regs_8;
> - else if (chip->gpio_chip.ngpio >= 24)
> + chip->read_regs = pca953x_read_regs_8;
> + } else if (chip->gpio_chip.ngpio >= 24) {
> chip->write_regs = pca953x_write_regs_24;
> - else
> + chip->read_regs = pca953x_read_regs_24;
> + } else {
> chip->write_regs = chip->chip_type == PCA953X_TYPE ?
> pca953x_write_regs_16 :
> pca957x_write_regs_16;
> + chip->read_regs = pca953x_read_regs_16;
> + }
Would you move {} to the previous patch?
--
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevche...@linux.intel.com>
Intel Finland Oy
