Re: [PATCH] SC26XX: New serial driver for SC2681 uarts

[Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>]

On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 00:41:12 +0100 tsbogend@alpha.franken.de (Thomas Bogendoerfer) wrote:

> On Mon, Dec 03, 2007 at 03:53:17PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Sun,  2 Dec 2007 20:43:46 +0100 (CET)
> > Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@alpha.franken.de> wrote:
> > 
> > > New serial driver for SC2681/SC2691 uarts. Older SNI RM400 machines are
> > > using these chips for onboard serial ports.
> > > 
> > 
> > Little things...
> 
> here is an updated version.
> 
> Changes:
>    - use container_of
>    - remove not needed locking
>    - remove inlines
>    - fix macros with double argument reference
> 
> Thomas.
> --
> 
> New serial driver for SC2681/SC2691 uarts. Older SNI RM400 machines are
> using these chips for onboard serial ports.
> 

grumble.

These:

> +#define READ_SC(p, r)        readb((p)->membase + RD_##r)
> +#define WRITE_SC(p, r, v)    writeb((v), (p)->membase + WR_##r)

and these:

> +#define READ_SC_PORT(p, r)     read_sc_port(p, RD_PORT_##r)
> +#define WRITE_SC_PORT(p, r, v) write_sc_port(p, WR_PORT_##r, v)

really don't need to exist.  All they do is make the code harder to read.

Think of the poor reader who sees this:

		status = READ_SC_PORT(port, SR);

and then goes madly searching for "SR".  After a while, our confused reader
might think to go look at the definition of READ_SC_PORT, after which our
reader will emulate a C preprocessor in wetware and will eventually construct
then hunt down RD_PORT_SR and will then hopefully remember what the heck he was
trying to do in the first place.

This sucks.

Code is written once and is read a thousand times.  Please optimise for
reading.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/