On Wed, May 07, 2025 at 04:19:29PM +0200, Ivan Vecera wrote:
> On 07. 05. 25 3:41 odp., Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 3:45 PM Ivan Vecera <ivecera@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
...
> > > +static const struct zl3073x_pdata zl3073x_pdata[ZL3073X_MAX_CHANNELS] = {
> > > + { .channel = 0, },
> > > + { .channel = 1, },
> > > + { .channel = 2, },
> > > + { .channel = 3, },
> > > + { .channel = 4, },
> > > +};
> >
> > > +static const struct mfd_cell zl3073x_devs[] = {
> > > + ZL3073X_CELL("zl3073x-dpll", 0),
> > > + ZL3073X_CELL("zl3073x-dpll", 1),
> > > + ZL3073X_CELL("zl3073x-dpll", 2),
> > > + ZL3073X_CELL("zl3073x-dpll", 3),
> > > + ZL3073X_CELL("zl3073x-dpll", 4),
> > > +};
> >
> > > +#define ZL3073X_MAX_CHANNELS 5
> >
> > Btw, wouldn't be better to keep the above lists synchronised like
> >
> > 1. Make ZL3073X_CELL() to use indexed variant
> >
> > [idx] = ...
> >
> > 2. Define the channel numbers
> >
> > and use them in both data structures.
> >
> It could be possible to drop zl3073x_pdata array and modify ZL3073X_CELL
> this way:
>
> #define ZL3073X_CHANNEL(_channel) \
> &(const struct zl3073x_pdata) { .channel = _channel }
>
> #define ZL3073X_CELL(_name, _channel) \
> MFD_CELL_BASIC(_name, NULL, ZL3073X_CHANNEL(_channel), \
> sizeof(struct zl3073x_pdata), 0)
>
> WDYT?
Fine with me as it looks not ugly and addresses my point.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
