Thread (1 message) 1 message, 1 author, 2014-01-13
  • (off-list ancestor, not in this archive)
  • Re: DT include files · Gerhard Sittig <hidden> · 2014-01-13

DT include files

From: Gerhard Sittig <hidden>
Date: 2014-01-13 18:10:17
Also in: linux-devicetree

On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 09:48 -0700, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 01/10/2014 10:03 AM, Gerhard Sittig wrote:
quoted
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 09:30 -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
quoted
As for *.h vs. *.dtsi naming, if the include is only pre-processor
defines, then I think using .h is the right way. Otherwise, if there
is any dts syntax, then .dtsi is the right name. It looks to me like
this style has been followed in both the imx and s3c64xx cases.

On a side note, I'm not really a fan of this pattern:

#define FOO1 1 2 3

#define BAR FOO1 FOO2 FOO3

While it definitely simplifies the dts files, it would never be used
in C and obfuscates what the actual property size is. Reading a dts
file, I would naturally assume the define was a single value while in
fact it could expand to a very large property size.
For more complex yet tedious repetitive cases like GPIO banks and
pins I've seen #define directives which introduce "functions"
(macros with parameters).  They appear to be rather useful, can
reflect very well the essence of the information, don't
necessarily pretend to be single values, but still may hide how
many cells they expand to.  For example:

  arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra30-cardhu.dtsi:
    interrupts = <TEGRA_GPIO(L, 0) IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
I'm not sure I entirely understand your point, but for the record, both
TEGRA_GPIO() and IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH expand to a single cell, as I would
expect (almost?) any DT macro to do.
It turns out I slightly misunderstood Rob's concern.  The issue
is not that the use of the C language preprocessor is discouraged
or frouned upon, but instead that obfuscating invariant data or
spilling random parts of the information across the place in
unneeded ways is unwanted.  While there is agreement that the use
of symbolic identifiers can help readability and maintainability
in certain situations.

Regarding your specific reply:  I haven't noticed before that all
of the macros I cited do expand to a single cell.  Before that I
saw the potential to generate more cells when required for a
single value (like "wide" addresses, or multi cell pins or
channels or whatever).  Can't tell how much of a concern there is
against such an approach, don't have strong feelings about it.

Actually I wasn't picking at those specific macros above, quite
the contrary.  Those were the first I came across searching for
demonstration of useful preprocessor use. :)  I just did not
bother to cite several hundred other useful phrases as well.


virtually yours
Gerhard Sittig
-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr. 5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: +49-8142-66989-0 Fax: +49-8142-66989-80  Email: office at denx.de
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help