On Thu, 09 Jun 2011 00:56:08 +0200 Carl-Daniel Hailfinger c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net wrote:
Am 08.06.2011 04:55 schrieb Stefan Tauner:
Signed-off-by: Stefan Tauner stefan.tauner@student.tuwien.ac.at
ichspi.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++------------------------ 1 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
diff --git a/ichspi.c b/ichspi.c index 12727d1..dff6f32 100644 --- a/ichspi.c +++ b/ichspi.c @@ -913,37 +913,30 @@ static int ich9_run_opcode(OPCODE op, uint32_t offset, static int run_opcode(OPCODE op, uint32_t offset, uint8_t datalength, uint8_t * data) {
- uint8_t maxlength = spi_programmer->max_data_read;
Mh. I see what you're doing here, and it makes sense, but a comment would be appreciated in the code: /* The maximum data length is identical on ICH/VIA for the maximum read length and for the maximum write length without opcode and address. Opcode and address are stored in separate registers, not in the data registers. The only exception applies if the opcode definition (un)intentionally classifies said opcode incorrectly as non-address opcode or vice versa. */
Any suggestions on how to improve that comment?
i am not sure if this is the right place to put the second half of that comment, because i dont really see the relevance inside that function: it just delegates its inputs. OTOH it makes sense to have it at a place where both versions share code. what about putting "The maximum payload lengths for read and write operations without opcode and address are identical on ICH/VIA - using max_data_read arbitrarily here." there and the rest inside ich_spi_send_command in the "/* translate read/write array/count */" comment-block?