Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 19 Jul 2008 22:04:19 +0200 | From | Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 3/3] at91_mci: introduce per-mci-revision conditional code |
| |
On 12:04 Thu 17 Jul , Ben Dooks wrote: > On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 11:42:01AM +0200, Nicolas Ferre wrote: > > We used to manage features and differences on a per-cpu basis. As several > > cpus share the same mci revision, this patch aggregates cpus that have the > > same IP revision in one defined constant. > > > > Signed-off-by: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@atmel.com> > > --- > > drivers/mmc/host/at91_mci.c | 21 +++++++++++++-------- > > 1 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/at91_mci.c b/drivers/mmc/host/at91_mci.c > > index 4e3edf3..a95529c 100644 > > --- a/drivers/mmc/host/at91_mci.c > > +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/at91_mci.c > > @@ -80,6 +80,11 @@ > > > > #define DRIVER_NAME "at91_mci" > > > > +#define AT91MCI_REV2 ( cpu_is_at91sam9260() \ > > + || cpu_is_at91sam9263() \ > > + || cpu_is_at91cap9() \ > > + || cpu_is_at91sam9rl()) > > + > > How about making it an inline function to avoid the horrible > upper-case all throughtout? > How about also naming as at91mci_is_rev2() to a few more explicit?
Best Regards, J.
| |