On Tue, Dec 29, 2020 at 1:30 AM Daniel Scally <djrscally(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 28/12/2020 22:55, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 10:37:38PM +0000, Daniel Scally wrote:
>> On 28/12/2020 17:05, Sakari Ailus wrote:
>>> On Thu, Dec 24, 2020 at 02:54:44PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>>>> +#include <linux/property.h>
>>>>> +#define CIO2_HID "INT343E"
>>>>> +#define CIO2_NUM_PORTS 4
>>> This is already defined in ipu3-cio2.h. Could you include that instead?
>> Yes; but I'd need to also include media/v4l2-device.h and
>> media/videobuf2-dma-sg.h (they're included in ipu3-cio2-main.c at the
>> moment). It didn't seem worth it; but I can move those two includes from
>> the .c to the .h and then include ipu3-cio2.h in cio2-bridge.h
>> Which do you prefer?
> I think here should be a
> compromise variant, split out something like ipu3-cio2-defs.h which can be
> included in both ipu3-cio2.h and cio2-bridge.h.
And just including all the things that need to be in both files you mean?
Something which may be logically grouped together. It may include
something which cio2-bridge doesn't need, but at least it will be in
one place (for example, if you move one CIO2_PCI_* constant, that
means you better move all, or so, the rest CIO2_PCI_* constants as
With Best Regards,