On 07. 05. 25 5:00 odp., Andy Shevchenko wrote:
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.
Will submit v8 shortly..
Thanks for review and advice.
Ivan
