[PATCH v2 2/3] ARM: i.MX51: clean up iomux-mx51.h

On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 11:43:02AM -0700, Troy Kisky wrote:

On 8/11/2011 7:53 AM, Fabio Estevam wrote:

quoted

Hi Troy,

On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:31 PM, Troy Kisky
[off-list ref] wrote:
...

quoted

diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-mxc/include/mach/iomux-mx51.h b/arch/arm/plat-mxc/include/mach/iomux-mx51.h
index df6acc0..c7f5169 100644
--- a/arch/arm/plat-mxc/include/mach/iomux-mx51.h
+++ b/arch/arm/plat-mxc/include/mach/iomux-mx51.h

@@ -14,6 +14,8 @@
 #define __MACH_IOMUX_MX51_H__

 #include <mach/iomux-v3.h>
+#define __NA_  0x000
+

Do we really need this __NA_ define? Can?t we continue just writing 0
in the macro?

Regards,

Fabio Estevam

First, welcome back from vacation and thanks for taking the time to review.

I like the __NA_ macro for a couple of reasons.


1. It keeps the macro arguments aligned from line to line. 5 character
name so that a line that uses 0xnnn instead, usually has its arguments
aligned with a line that uses __NA_.

2. It makes it more obvious that this field is "not applicable" to this
setting.

3. NON_PAD_I is replaced with __NA_ as it has the same use, and keeps
alignment.

I'm fine with the __NA_ macro.

Sascha

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |