Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753501AbaLDJDy (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Dec 2014 04:03:54 -0500 Received: from fw-tnat.cambridge.arm.com ([217.140.96.140]:46087 "EHLO cam-smtp0.cambridge.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753049AbaLDJDv (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Dec 2014 04:03:51 -0500 Message-ID: <54802355.4070500@arm.com> Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2014 09:03:17 +0000 From: Andrew Jackson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Brown CC: Jaroslav Kysela , Takashi Iwai , "alsa-devel@alsa-project.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Rajeev Kumar , Liam Girdwood , Liviu Dudau Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] ASoC: dwc: Iterate over all channels References: <547F3CA5.2010500@arm.com> <20141203172928.GD7712@sirena.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <20141203172928.GD7712@sirena.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 12/03/14 17:29, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, Dec 03, 2014 at 04:39:01PM +0000, Andrew Jackson wrote: > >> + /* Iterate over set of channels - independently controlled. >> + */ >> + do { >> + if (substream->stream == SNDRV_PCM_STREAM_PLAYBACK) { >> + i2s_write_reg(dev->i2s_base, TCR(ch_reg), >> + xfer_resolution); >> + i2s_write_reg(dev->i2s_base, TFCR(ch_reg), 0x02); >> + irq = i2s_read_reg(dev->i2s_base, IMR(ch_reg)); >> + i2s_write_reg(dev->i2s_base, IMR(ch_reg), irq & ~0x30); >> + i2s_write_reg(dev->i2s_base, TER(ch_reg), 1); >> + } else { >> + i2s_write_reg(dev->i2s_base, RCR(ch_reg), >> + xfer_resolution); >> + i2s_write_reg(dev->i2s_base, RFCR(ch_reg), 0x07); >> + irq = i2s_read_reg(dev->i2s_base, IMR(ch_reg)); >> + i2s_write_reg(dev->i2s_base, IMR(ch_reg), irq & ~0x03); >> + i2s_write_reg(dev->i2s_base, RER(ch_reg), 1); >> + } >> + } while (ch_reg-- > 0); > > The normal way to write an iteration would be with a for loop - why are > we not doing that? The intention was to minimise the changes, excluding whitespace, between this version and the original. Also, it is a perfectly valid looping construct. I'm happy to rework it into a for loop. > Also I see that you've not sent these as a single thread - please use > --thread. > Andrew -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/