Re: [PATCH 13/13] drivers/media/tuners/e4000.c: use macros for i2c_msg initialization

From: Julia Lawall
Date: Tue Dec 18 2012 - 07:36:32 EST

On Tue, 18 Dec 2012, Jean Delvare wrote:

> Hi Julia,
> On Thu, 11 Oct 2012 08:45:43 +0200 (CEST), Julia Lawall wrote:
> > I found 6 cases where there are more than 2 messages in the array. I
> > didn't check how many cases where there are two messages but there is
> > something other than one read and one write.
> >
> > Perhaps a reasonable option would be to use
> >
> >
> > The last two are for the few cases where more flags are specified. As
> > compared to the original proposal of I2C_MSG_OP, these keep the READ or
> > WRITE idea in the macro name. The additional argument to the OP macros
> > would be or'd with the read or write (nothing to do in this case) flags as
> > appropriate.
> >
> > Mauro proposed INIT_I2C_READ_SUBADDR for the very common case where a
> > message array has one read and one write. I think that putting one
> > I2C_MSG_READ and one I2C_MSG_WRITE in this case is readable enough, and
> > avoids the need to do something special for the cases that don't match the
> > expectations of INIT_I2C_READ_SUBADDR.
> >
> > I propose not to do anything for the moment either for sizes or for
> > message or buffer arrays that contain only one element.
> Please note that I resigned from my position of i2c subsystem
> maintainer, so I will not handle this. If you think this is important,
> you'll have to resubmit and Wolfram will decide what he wants to do
> about it.

OK, I had the impression that the conclusion was that the danger was
greater than the benefit. If there is interest in it, since I think it
does make the code more readable, I can pick it up again.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at