On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 01:44:10PM +0100, Richard Fitzgerald wrote:
On Thu, 2017-07-13 at 11:05 +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
quoted
On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 09:02:10AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
quoted
quoted
This patch has been rejected by Linus.
quoted
quoted
https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/7/7/579
quoted
Hrm, when I used to push the register definition patches I did elide all
the obviously repeated register banks like the write sequencer one that
Linus is calling out there. I'm surprised by the "every single line"
bit though...
Linux doesn't say what he wants us to do about it. I could manually
strip out a few more definitions but seriously, it makes the code a lot
harder to maintain if we can't grep it for use of registers and register
fields. They are big chips, they have a lot of stuff in the registers.
I'd take it up with him, if you can explain why it looks very
repetitive but isn't actually that'd help...
Building up copies of the repeated IPs with macros would help too (the
AIF and especially frame control registers stick out like a sore thumb
here), as would removing the individual registers for the write
sequencer block.