Re: [PATCH 2.6.13 10/20] aic94xx: aic94xx_reg.c Register access

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> +/* We know that the register wanted is in the range
> + * of the sliding window.
> + */
> +#define ASD_READ_SW(ww, type, ord)                                     \
> +static inline type asd_read_##ww##_##ord (struct asd_ha_struct *asd_ha,\
> +					  u32 reg)                     \
> +{                                                                      \
> +	struct asd_ha_addrspace *io_handle = &asd_ha->io_handle[0];    \
> +	u32 map_offs=(reg - io_handle-> ww##_base )+asd_mem_offs_##ww ();\
> +	return asd_read_##ord (asd_ha, (unsigned long) map_offs);      \
> +}
> +
> +#define ASD_WRITE_SW(ww, type, ord)                                    \
> +static inline void asd_write_##ww##_##ord (struct asd_ha_struct *asd_ha,\
> +				  u32 reg, type val)                   \
> +{                                                                      \
> +	struct asd_ha_addrspace *io_handle = &asd_ha->io_handle[0];    \
> +	u32 map_offs=(reg - io_handle-> ww##_base )+asd_mem_offs_##ww ();\
> +	asd_write_##ord (asd_ha, (unsigned long) map_offs, val);       \
> +}
> +
> +ASD_READ_SW(swa, u8,  byte);
> +ASD_READ_SW(swa, u16, word);
> +ASD_READ_SW(swa, u32, dword);
> +
> +ASD_READ_SW(swb, u8,  byte);
> +ASD_READ_SW(swb, u16, word);
> +ASD_READ_SW(swb, u32, dword);
> +
> +ASD_READ_SW(swc, u8,  byte);
> +ASD_READ_SW(swc, u16, word);
> +ASD_READ_SW(swc, u32, dword);
> +
> +ASD_WRITE_SW(swa, u8,  byte);
> +ASD_WRITE_SW(swa, u16, word);
> +ASD_WRITE_SW(swa, u32, dword);
> +
> +ASD_WRITE_SW(swb, u8,  byte);
> +ASD_WRITE_SW(swb, u16, word);
> +ASD_WRITE_SW(swb, u32, dword);
> +
> +ASD_WRITE_SW(swc, u8,  byte);
> +ASD_WRITE_SW(swc, u16, word);
> +ASD_WRITE_SW(swc, u32, dword);

This is certainly nice entry into "best abuse of macros" contest. Do
you really need all those inline functions?

> +static void __asd_write_reg_byte(struct asd_ha_struct *asd_ha, u32 reg, u8 val)
> +{
> +	struct asd_ha_addrspace *io_handle=&asd_ha->io_handle[0];
> +	BUG_ON(reg >= 0xC0000000 || reg < ALL_BASE_ADDR);

Will this work correctly with 2GB/2GB split kernels?
								Pavel

-- 
if you have sharp zaurus hardware you don't need... you know my address
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/