LKML Archive on
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Olliver Schinagl <>
To: Mark Brown <>
Cc: Axel Lin <>, Chen-Yu Tsai <>,
	Priit Laes <>, Liam Girdwood <>,
	LKML <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: axp20x: Get rid of AXP20X_xxx_START/END/STEPS defines
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 21:26:32 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>

On 27-02-2019 21:05, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 08:41:46PM +0100, Olliver Schinagl wrote:
>> On 25-02-2019 18:25, Mark Brown wrote:
>>> If you find you need to describe what the fields are it would be much
>>> more constructive to add a comment at the top of the table saying what
>>> they are.  As things are this isn't helping anyone - as a big pile of
>>> defines it's hard to read the values without context for how they're
>>> used and if you're looking at the table you can't tell what the
>>> regulator actually supports without going and decoding the defines.
>> Then the name of the define should be more constructive, which imo they
>> are reasonably? But as everything with programming, naming things is the
>> he hardest part, right?
> I really don't think that's it - I think that sometimes a data table is
> just a data table.  There are some coding styles that work to avoid
> having raw numbers anywhere in code outside of defines at all costs but
> I do think that goes too far in cases like this where the name of the
> define is at some level just going to summarize what should go in a
> given slot in a table which adds little.

I'm not sure if we're still talking about the same thing or same table;
In any case, this is something up to personal taste in the end, and I am
in the camp that favors (readable, which of course could always be
improved) defines over magic values; especially when it comes to these
bit-selectors. And even if a little less here, to keep things consistent
with all defines is why at least I prefer the one approach. You guys
prefer the raw values. Two flavors of two opinions I suppose :)

  reply	other threads:[~2019-02-27 20:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-02-20 16:50 Axel Lin
2019-02-20 21:38 ` Olliver Schinagl
2019-02-21  0:22   ` Axel Lin
2019-02-21  9:42     ` Mark Brown
2019-02-23  7:55       ` Olliver Schinagl
2019-02-23 12:54         ` Axel Lin
2019-02-23 20:37           ` Olliver Schinagl
2019-02-25 17:25             ` Mark Brown
2019-02-27 19:41               ` Olliver Schinagl
2019-02-27 20:05                 ` Mark Brown
2019-02-27 20:26                   ` Olliver Schinagl [this message]
2019-03-23 13:41             ` Axel Lin

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:

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

  git send-email \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH] regulator: axp20x: Get rid of AXP20X_xxx_START/END/STEPS defines' \

* 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).