On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 1:51 AM, Wolfgang Grandegger <w...@grandegger.com> wrote: > Grant Likely wrote: >> The table definition is more verbose this way, but I think it results >> in more understandable and easier to extend code. It also adds lets >> the compiler do more type checking for you. > > OK but I don't like the callback function to do the settings. We need > backward compatibility with old DTS files including the ugly "dfsrr" > property, right? Then it seems consequent to continue using i2c->flags > for that purpose and not to introduce another method. If we don't need > backward compatibility, we could drop the flags completely and just use > callback functions.
I don't understand why you don't like it. It's an elegant solution and it simplifies the code somewhat. After grabbing the callback pointer the compatibility code can simply override it. But I won't belabor the point or oppose the patch if you stick with the flags pointer. >>> --- linux-2.6.orig/arch/powerpc/platforms/52xx/mpc52xx_common.c 2009-03-31 >>> 13:25:08.000000000 +0200 >>> +++ linux-2.6/arch/powerpc/platforms/52xx/mpc52xx_common.c 2009-03-31 >>> 13:28:54.309718526 +0200 >>> +int fsl_i2c_get_fdr(struct device_node *node, u32 i2c_clock, u32 i2c_flags) >>> +{ >>> [...] >>> +} >>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(fsl_i2c_get_fdr); >> >> does not work on a multiplatform kernel. Both 8xxx and 52xx support >> can be selected at the same time. > > OK, then we need different functions including stubs. I've been thinking about this more. These tables are only ever going to be used by the i2c_mpc driver and so really they are a part of the i2c_mpc driver itself. Putting them into common code doesn't make any sense because it is not common code. I will not merge a patch that puts them into mpc5200 common code. g. -- Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng. Secret Lab Technologies Ltd. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev