Thanks Joe for your feedback, > -----Original Message----- > From: Joe Hershberger [mailto:joe.hershber...@gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2016 11:13 AM > To: Vikas MANOCHA <vikas.mano...@st.com> > Cc: Michael Kurz <michi.k...@gmail.com>; u-boot@lists.denx.de; Toshifumi > NISHINAGA <tnishinaga....@gmail.com>; Albert > Aribaud <albert.u.b...@aribaud.net>; Joe Hershberger > <joe.hershber...@ni.com>; Kamil Lulko <kamil.lu...@gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v3 3/9] ARM: stm32: cleanup stm32f7 files > > On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 1:09 PM, Vikas MANOCHA <vikas.mano...@st.com> wrote: > > Hi Joe, > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Joe Hershberger [mailto:joe.hershber...@gmail.com] > >> Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2016 10:42 AM > >> To: Vikas MANOCHA <vikas.mano...@st.com> > >> Cc: Michael Kurz <michi.k...@gmail.com>; u-boot@lists.denx.de; > >> Toshifumi NISHINAGA <tnishinaga....@gmail.com>; Albert Aribaud > >> <albert.u.b...@aribaud.net>; Joe Hershberger > >> <joe.hershber...@ni.com>; Kamil Lulko <kamil.lu...@gmail.com> > >> Subject: Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v3 3/9] ARM: stm32: cleanup stm32f7 > >> files > >> > >> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 12:18 PM, vikas <vikas.mano...@st.com> wrote: > >> > Hi Michael, > >> > > >> > On 11/24/2016 11:10 AM, Michael Kurz wrote: > >> >> Cleanup stm32f7 files: > >> >> - use BIT macro > >> >> - use GENMASK macro > >> > > >> > good. > >> > > >> >> - use rcc struct instead of macro additions > >> > > >> > Macro definitions are better than struct to make rcc compatible > >> > throughout the stm32f7 family in case of additional registers and > >> also to reuse it for stm32f4. At present we cant use same rcc struct > >> for stm32f4 and stm32f7 because of two additional registers in stm32f7. > >> > So keep the macros for rcc, we would move it for both stm32f7 and > >> > stm32f4. > >> > >> Just 2 extra regs, or they change the position of the existing regs? > > > > only extra registers (infact only 1 extra register, not 2). > > If just extra, then use the struct. Who cares if there is an extra reg that > you don't use?
The extra register is to select the clock source for peripherals like u(s)arts, i2c etc. I don’t want to neglect it. But again, today its one, tomorrow there would be more. Off-course the locations and definitions might change (unlikey) but macros provide better compatibility. My first choice is also structures as it makes debugging/maintenance easier but it not scalable. Do you agree ? Another approach could be to have another additional struct like "rcc_ext_f7" pointing to end of "rcc_common" struct. What's your opinion about it ? Cheers, Vikas > > >> > >> > rcc struct shouldn't be in for stm32f7 in first place, the last patch > >> > which added it went unnoticed. > >> > > >> >> > >> >> Signed-off-by: Michael Kurz <michi.k...@gmail.com> > >> >> > >> >> --- > >> >> > >> >> Changes in v3: > >> >> - Removed 'prefix all constants with STM32_' > >> >> - Reverted move of header into source file (rcc.h -> clock.c) > >> >> > >> >> Changes in v2: > >> >> - Add cleanup patch > >> >> > >> >> arch/arm/include/asm/arch-stm32f7/fmc.h | 6 +- > >> >> arch/arm/include/asm/arch-stm32f7/gpt.h | 6 +- > >> >> arch/arm/include/asm/arch-stm32f7/rcc.h | 50 ++++++---- > >> >> arch/arm/include/asm/arch-stm32f7/stm32.h | 8 +- > >> >> arch/arm/mach-stm32/stm32f7/clock.c | 154 > >> >> ++++++++++++----------------- > >> >> board/st/stm32f746-disco/stm32f746-disco.c | 7 +- > >> >> 6 files changed, 107 insertions(+), 124 deletions(-) > >> >> > >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-stm32f7/fmc.h > >> >> b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-stm32f7/fmc.h > >> >> index 7dd5077..d61a86f 100644 > >> >> --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-stm32f7/fmc.h > >> >> +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-stm32f7/fmc.h > >> >> @@ -58,12 +58,12 @@ struct stm32_fmc_regs { > >> >> #define FMC_SDCMR_MODE_SELFREFRESH 5 > >> >> #define FMC_SDCMR_MODE_POWERDOWN 6 > >> >> > >> >> -#define FMC_SDCMR_BANK_1 (1 << 4) > >> >> -#define FMC_SDCMR_BANK_2 (1 << 3) > >> >> +#define FMC_SDCMR_BANK_1 BIT(4) > >> >> +#define FMC_SDCMR_BANK_2 BIT(3) > >> >> > >> > > >> > [...] _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot