Return-path: Received: from mail-we0-f174.google.com ([74.125.82.174]:61670 "EHLO mail-we0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753188Ab2HPT3a convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Aug 2012 15:29:30 -0400 Received: by weyx8 with SMTP id x8so1965548wey.19 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2012 12:29:29 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <502D3F3F.7060207@broadcom.com> References: <1345132801-8430-1-git-send-email-hauke@hauke-m.de> <1345132801-8430-4-git-send-email-hauke@hauke-m.de> <1791263.5FQJJv4xHF@bender> <502D3F3F.7060207@broadcom.com> Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2012 21:29:28 +0200 Message-ID: (sfid-20120816_212934_368051_7F4BF354) Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] MIPS: BCM47xx: rewrite GPIO handling and use gpiolib From: =?UTF-8?B?UmFmYcWCIE1pxYJlY2tp?= To: Arend van Spriel Cc: Florian Fainelli , Hauke Mehrtens , ralf@linux-mips.org, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, john@phrozen.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: 2012/8/16 Arend van Spriel : > On 08/16/2012 07:39 PM, Rafał Miłecki wrote: >> >> 2012/8/16 Florian Fainelli: >>>> >>>> >>+void __init bcm47xx_gpio_init(void) >>>> >>+{ >>>> >>+ int err; >>>> >>+ >>>> >>+ switch (bcm47xx_bus_type) { >>>> >>+#ifdef CONFIG_BCM47XX_SSB >>>> >>+ case BCM47XX_BUS_TYPE_SSB: >>>> >>+ bcm47xx_gpio_count = ssb_gpio_count(&bcm47xx_bus.ssb); >>>> >>+#endif >>>> >>+#ifdef CONFIG_BCM47XX_BCMA >>>> >>+ case BCM47XX_BUS_TYPE_BCMA: >>>> >>+ bcm47xx_gpio_count = >>>> >> bcma_gpio_count(&bcm47xx_bus.bcma.bus); >>>> >>+#endif >>>> >>+ } >>> >>> > >>> >Is this exclusive? Cannot we have both SSB and BCMA on the same device? >> >> This applies to SoC only, so I believe it's fine. We don't have SoCs >> based on BCMA and SSB at the same time. > > > It is indeed more than unlikely for a chip to have two silicon > interconnects, which is what SSB and BCMA are. However, it does look > suspicious from a code reading perspective. So I general I stick to the rule > that each case must have a break and fall-thru are clearly commented. Ahh, I though question is related to the enum used for bustype. I definitely vote for using "break" -- Rafał