Re: [PATCH v5 2/7] mailbox: arm_mhu: add driver for ARM MHU controller

On 5 February 2015 at 17:38, Russell King - ARM Linux
[off-list ref] wrote:

On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 05:32:39PM +0530, Jassi Brar wrote:

quoted

On Feb 5, 2015 5:13 PM, "Arnd Bergmann" [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

quoted

I know typedef's are frowned upon, but how bad is the following option?
       typedef void*  mbox_data_info
       int mbox_send_message(struct mbox_chan *chan, mbox_data_info

data);

quoted

I don't see how that would help.

If it's abuse because the argument is a void*... What if we called it
mbox_data_info?  To say platforms are free to pass data as a pointer or a
value :)

Using a typedef really doesn't change anything.  If you read the kernel
coding style, you'll realise that typedefs are a reason to reject
patches - especially to use them in the way you are proposing.

I started with "I know typedef's are frowned upon". But thanks for reminding me.

Instead of a void*, we could say a client passes data to the
controller via an argument that is sizeof(void *) big, so we
facilitate both usages. Anyways, I get the message that that is not
acceptable.

Try the solution I suggested (which I notice was seemingly totally
ignored.)

My client drivers work in blocking mode, so I don't suffer. For the
platform that passes u32 in async mode, we'll let it manage its own
circular buffer scheme as you suggested.

Thanks.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html