From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from metis.ext.pengutronix.de ([2001:67c:670:201:290:27ff:fe1d:cc33]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1jQPsC-0005jm-UN for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 06:25:42 +0000 References: <20200415092916.21285-1-a.fatoum@pengutronix.de> <20200420062232.GB1694@pengutronix.de> From: Ahmad Fatoum Message-ID: <1890d7dd-db55-8237-059a-be522b5c0d17@pengutronix.de> Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2020 08:25:37 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200420062232.GB1694@pengutronix.de> Content-Language: en-US List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "barebox" Errors-To: barebox-bounces+u.kleine-koenig=pengutronix.de@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] mci: sdhci: provide sdhci_readx_poll_timeout helpers To: Sascha Hauer Cc: barebox@lists.infradead.org On 4/20/20 8:22 AM, Sascha Hauer wrote: > On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 11:29:13AM +0200, Ahmad Fatoum wrote: >> The sdhci_readN accessors don't lend themselves for clean use with >> readx_poll_timeout because they accept two arguments. Add >> a sdhci-specific helper, so the sdhci drivers can cut down on the >> timeout loop boilerplate. > Is this really an improvement? How many variants of these helpers will we get? It's used 6 times within this series. Other SDHCI drivers can make use of it too. Would you prefer extending with a two arg accessor variant instead? Cheers, -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox