Return-path: Received: from mail-qw0-f46.google.com ([209.85.216.46]:44310 "EHLO mail-qw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751690Ab1BQWPU convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Feb 2011 17:15:20 -0500 Received: by qwa26 with SMTP id 26so2816633qwa.19 for ; Thu, 17 Feb 2011 14:15:19 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1297980018.13554.4.camel@maggie> References: <1297894657.32237.2.camel@maggie> <1297980018.13554.4.camel@maggie> Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 23:15:18 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC] How to rename SSB_TMSLOW_*, B43_TMSLOW_*? From: =?UTF-8?B?UmFmYcWCIE1pxYJlY2tp?= To: =?UTF-8?Q?Michael_B=C3=BCsch?= Cc: George Kashperko , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, b43-dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: W dniu 17 lutego 2011 23:00 użytkownik Michael Büsch napisał: > On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 13:14 +0100, Rafał Miłecki wrote: >> That's why I wanted to introduce some SSBAI_CORECTL_FOOBAR and make >> b43 unaware it that flags are going to be written in register A or B. >> I wanted b43 to just pass flags to correct function and do not care >> about place where they are getting written. > > Ok, well. That's basically what I am talking about for several > days now. > > 1) Keep SSB and AI separated. > 2) Introduce an additional thin layer on top of this to abstract the > bus to the drivers. OK, but how do you see core flags implemented in such a layout? The ugly way I proposed seems to match your idea but... is ugly. Can you say sth more about that? What about such a shared things that differs in a minimal way? -- Rafał