Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760980Ab2FDQp6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Jun 2012 12:45:58 -0400 Received: from mail2.gnudd.com ([213.203.150.91]:46233 "EHLO mail.gnudd.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752297Ab2FDQp4 (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Jun 2012 12:45:56 -0400 Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2012 18:45:31 +0200 From: Alessandro Rubini To: alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk Cc: federico.vaga@gmail.com, wg@grandegger.com, mkl@pengutronix.de, giancarlo.asnaghi@st.com, alan@linux.intel.com, linux-can@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] c_can_pci: generic module for c_can on PCI Message-ID: <20120604164531.GA22000@mail.gnudd.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Organization: GnuDD, Device Drivers, Embedded Systems, Courses In-Reply-To: <20120604165619.15ba43bf@pyramind.ukuu.org.uk> References: <20120604165619.15ba43bf@pyramind.ukuu.org.uk> <4FC135C6.5030206@grandegger.com> <1338816766-7089-1-git-send-email-federico.vaga@gmail.com> <1338816766-7089-2-git-send-email-federico.vaga@gmail.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1433 Lines: 36 > Anythign wrong with > > bool aligned32; I personally think booleans are evil. But both this and the other thing: >> +static u16 c_can_pci_read_reg_aligned_to_16bit(struct c_can_priv *priv, >> + void *reg) > > I'm a bit worried this function name might be too short ;) come from the platform driver this is based on (I already blamed federico offlist for not preserving authorship of the original file). So, this file is mostly copied from the platform driver, which is a duplication of code. A mandated duplication, given how the thing is currently laid out: the c_can core driver exports functions that the other two files are using (the platform and the new pci driver). In my opinion, it would be much better to have one less layer and no exports at all. The core driver should be a platform driver, and the pci driver would just build platform data and register the platform device. Sure this isn't up to federico, who has the pci device but cannot access any boards where the previous driver is used. What do the maintainers think? I (or federico :) may propose a reshaping, if the idea makes sense. /alessandro, another user of the sta2x11 where c_can_pci lives -- 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/