[spi-devel-general] [PATCH] Adapt spi_mpc83xx SPI driver for 832x
David Brownell
david-b at pacbell.net
Sat Dec 23 11:57:11 EST 2006
On Wednesday 13 December 2006 4:13 pm, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
>
> > The problem I have with this patch is that it has too much
> > #ifdeffery. If
>
> Too much? There is only 2 of them.
But it's the wrong kind of #ifdeffery, and that's avoidable.
> > > (possibly this can be reduced by adding more logic to the
> > > tx_buf/rx_buf functions)
> > > not to mention what will happen when support for reversed
> > > bit order is added.
> >
> > Sure enough, sounds ugly. But cpu_is_xxx() macros, combined
> > with GCC dead
> > code elimination will strip out functions that are unused, so
> > that e.g.
> >
> > if (cpu_is_mpc834x())
> > fn = mpc834x_spi_tx_buf_u16;
> > else if (cpu_is_mpc832x())
> > fn = mpc832x_spi_tx_buf_u16;
> >
> > would only link one of them unless the kernel supports both SOCs. And
> > without in-driver #ifdeffery.
>
> Hmm, I can't find any cpu_is_xxx macros/functions. I guess the
> infrastructure isn't there yet?
So it would seem. At least for PPC. I noticed the patch from
Kumar Gala, which takes an alternate approach based on parameters
passed through platform_data ... that works too, in terms of
code being cleaner.
- Dave
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list