Hi,
On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 09:47:43AM +0300, Siarhei Volkau wrote:
> >> +#define SUN4I_REGMAP_FIELDS(chan) {\
> >> + [FIELD_PRESCALER] = \
> >> + REG_FIELD(PWM_CTRL_REG, \
> >> + BIT_CH(PWM_PRESCAL_LSB, chan), \
> >> + BIT_CH(PWM_PRESCAL_MSB, chan)), \
> >> + [FIELD_POLARITY] = \
> >> + REG_FIELD(PWM_CTRL_REG, \
> >> + BIT_CH(PWM_ACT_STATE_BIT, chan), \
> >> + BIT_CH(PWM_ACT_STATE_BIT, chan)), \
> >> + [FIELD_CLK_GATING] = \
> >> + REG_FIELD(PWM_CTRL_REG, \
> >> + BIT_CH(PWM_CLK_GATING_BIT, chan), \
> >> + BIT_CH(PWM_CLK_GATING_BIT, chan)), \
> >> + [FIELD_READY] = \
> >> + REG_FIELD(PWM_CTRL_REG, \
> >> + PWM_RDY_BIT(chan), \
> >> + PWM_RDY_BIT(chan)), \
> >> +}
> >> +
> >
> > This is not correct, unfortunately. If someone calls that macro with
> > chan++ or chan--, it will be modified four times instead of one as the
> > caller would expect.
>
> Ok, i will refactor that.
> I think you should know about existence of unsafe macros (like MIN
> MAX or ABS) into existing linux kernel tree, this macros can be easily
> refactored into the inline functions. Please tell me your point of view
> on that things.This might be bad, but we also have functions for those, which should behave properly. Anyway, I don't really expect you to fix the whole kernel before taking that patch in :) Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "linux-sunxi" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
