LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
To: "Li, Aubrey" <aubrey.li@linux.intel.com>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
	"Kumar P, Mahesh" <mahesh.kumar.p@intel.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] x86: pmc_atom: print index of device in loop
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 11:40:49 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1421919649.31903.123.camel@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <54C07247.20902@linux.intel.com>

On Thu, 2015-01-22 at 11:45 +0800, Li, Aubrey wrote:
> On 2015/1/21 5:50, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > The register mapping may change from one platform to another. Thus, indices
> > might be not the same on different platforms. The patch makes the code to print
> > the device index dynamically at run time.
> 
> Will another platform use the same table but different bit position? In
> my opinion, different platform should use different mapping table.

Yes, indeed.

The only improvement I could suggest now is to use indices for bit field
name from one array of possible names.

Or use macro to fill the item like 
#define BIT_X(bitname) { .name = __stringify(bitname), .bit_mask = BIT_
## bitname, }


> > 
> > The patch also changes the for loop to iterate over the map until a terminator
> > is found.
> 
> Why do we need to do this? did you see any hurt from the existing
> implementation?

Just a micro optimization plus it allows in consequent patches to avoid
size members in the pmc_reg_map.

-- 
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com>
Intel Finland Oy


  reply	other threads:[~2015-01-22  9:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-01-20 21:49 [PATCH v2 0/4] x86: pmc_atom: Add Cherrytrail support Andy Shevchenko
2015-01-20 21:50 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] x86: pmc_atom: save struct device pointer in pmc Andy Shevchenko
2015-01-22  3:42   ` Li, Aubrey
2015-01-22  9:29     ` Andy Shevchenko
2015-01-20 21:50 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] x86: pmc_atom: print index of device in loop Andy Shevchenko
2015-01-22  3:45   ` Li, Aubrey
2015-01-22  9:40     ` Andy Shevchenko [this message]
2015-01-20 21:50 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] x86: pmc_atom: supply register mappings via pmc object Andy Shevchenko
2015-01-20 21:50 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] PMC driver: Add Cherrytrail PMC interface Andy Shevchenko
2015-01-22  4:02   ` Li, Aubrey
2015-01-22  9:26     ` Andy Shevchenko
2015-01-26  2:30       ` Li, Aubrey
2015-02-23 12:45 ` [PATCH v2 0/4] x86: pmc_atom: Add Cherrytrail support Andy Shevchenko
2015-03-02  6:26   ` Li, Aubrey
2015-03-03  3:37   ` Li, Aubrey
2015-03-04 10:44     ` Andy Shevchenko
2015-03-30 13:05   ` Shevchenko, Andriy
2015-03-31 10:59     ` Ingo Molnar

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1421919649.31903.123.camel@linux.intel.com \
    --to=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=aubrey.li@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mahesh.kumar.p@intel.com \
    --cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] x86: pmc_atom: print index of device in loop' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).