Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Fri, 9 Sep 2022 14:23:10 +0200
From:   Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org>
To:     Ilpo =?utf-8?B?SsOkcnZpbmVu?= <ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com>
Cc:     Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@kernel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        linux-serial <linux-serial@vger.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Tobias Klauser <tklauser@distanz.ch>,
        Richard Genoud <richard.genoud@gmail.com>,
        Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@microchip.com>,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>,
        Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@microchip.com>,
        Vladimir Zapolskiy <vz@mleia.com>,
        Liviu Dudau <liviu.dudau@arm.com>,
        Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
        Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>,
        Shawn Guo <shawnguo@kernel.org>,
        Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>,
        Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@pengutronix.de>,
        Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com>,
        NXP Linux Team <linux-imx@nxp.com>,
        Andreas =?utf-8?Q?F=C3=A4rber?= <afaerber@suse.de>,
        Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani@kernel.org>,
        Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
        bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com,
        Pali =?utf-8?B?Um9ow6Fy?= <pali@kernel.org>,
        Kevin Cernekee <cernekee@gmail.com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
        Orson Zhai <orsonzhai@gmail.com>,
        Baolin Wang <baolin.wang7@gmail.com>,
        Chunyan Zhang <zhang.lyra@gmail.com>,
        Patrice Chotard <patrice.chotard@foss.st.com>,
        linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] tty: TX helpers
Message-ID: <YxswLiOaHQ5ajeOi@hovoldconsulting.com>
References: <20220906104805.23211-1-jslaby@suse.cz>
 <Yxcvbk281f/vy4vb@hovoldconsulting.com>
 <dec6d5c4-45b7-f087-95f4-bf1dae9e9d27@kernel.org>
 <4e9b4471-a6f2-4b16-d830-67d253ae4e6a@linux.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <4e9b4471-a6f2-4b16-d830-67d253ae4e6a@linux.intel.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Sep 07, 2022 at 01:16:23PM +0300, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:

> Also, I don't understand why you see it unreadable when the actual code is 
> out in the open in that macro. It's formatted much better than e.g. 
> read_poll_timeout() if you want an example of something that is hardly 
> readable ;-). I agree though there's a learning-curve, albeit small, that 
> it actually creates a function but that doesn't seem to me as big of an 
> obstacle you seem to think.

There's a huge difference between the proposed macro with its
I-lost-count-of-how-many arguments and levels of indirection and
something like wait_event() which take one condition and has a
descriptive name:

	wait_event(device->misc_wait, atomic_read(&device->ap_pending_cnt) == 0);

vs

	static DEFINE_UART_PORT_TX_HELPER_LIMITED(altera_jtaguart_do_tx_chars,
		true,
		writel(ch, port->membase + ALTERA_JTAGUART_DATA_REG),
		({}));

In the former case, you just need to look at the code to understand what
is going on, very much unlike in the latter case.

Johan