Hello Wolfgang,
On 21/05/2010, at 15:13, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
*rxp = buf_reg_val & 0xFF;rxp++;}Please change into:
if (rxp) *rxp++ = buf_reg_val & 0xFF;
Are you sure? Is folding that 3 line block into a one liner really worth the loss of readability? I know what that means, so do you and many others on this ML, but that's bound to raise a few eyebrows. A quick google search reveals quite a few articles devoted to clearing up the confusion about the semantics of that pointer dereference and post-increment. Just a few years ago I would have preferred your suggestion, but now I find that readability trumps cleverness, at least in a case like this. In the end it's your decision: if you like to be kinky, it's your prerogative ;-)
if ((o_cnt < len) && ((buf_reg_val & SPIBUF_TXFULL_MASK) == 0)) {/* write the data */data1_reg_val &= ~0xFFFF;if(txp) {data1_reg_val |= *txp;txp++;}Same here:
if (txp) data1_reg_val |= *txp++;
See my comment above.
Please fix all other occurrences of "if(" into "if (" as well.
OK
/* write to DAT1 is required to keep the serial transfer going *//* we just terminate when we reach the end */
will fix
writel(data1_reg_val &~(1 << SPIDAT1_CSHOLD_SHIFT), &ds->regs->dat1);Line too long.
ditto
Thanks for the feedback -- Delio
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
-- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd@denx.de The software required `Windows 95 or better', so I installed Linux.