[PATCH][WAS:bcmai,axi] bcma: add Broadcom specific AMBA bus driver

[George Kashperko]

> 2011/5/6 Rafał Miłecki <zajec5 at gmail.com>:
> > 2011/5/6 Arnd Bergmann <arnd at arndb.de>:
> >>> +const char *bcma_device_name(u16 coreid)
> >>> +{
> >>> +     switch (coreid) {
> >>> +     case BCMA_CORE_OOB_ROUTER:
> >>> +             return "OOB Router";
> >>> +     case BCMA_CORE_INVALID:
> >>> +             return "Invalid";
> >>> +     case BCMA_CORE_CHIPCOMMON:
> >>> +             return "ChipCommon";
> >>> +     case BCMA_CORE_ILINE20:
> >>> +             return "ILine 20";
> >>
> >> It's better to make that a data structure than a switch() statement,
> >> both from readability and efficiency aspects.
> >
> > Well, maybe. We call it only once, at init time. In any case we're
> > still waiting for Broadcom to clarify which cores are really used for
> > BCMA.
> 
> Arnd: did you have a look at defines at all?
> 
> Most of the defines have values in range 0x800 → 0x837. Converting
> this to array means loosing 0x800 u16 entries. We can not use 0x800
> offset, because there are also some defined between 0x000 and 0x800:
> #define BCMA_CORE_OOB_ROUTER           0x367   /* Out of band */
> #define BCMA_CORE_INVALID              0x700
> 
> Oh and there is still:
> #define BCMA_CORE_DEFAULT              0xFFF
> we could want to include. Then we would loose additional (0xFFF -
> 0x837) u16 entries in array.
What is the purpose for bcma_device_name in bus driver code ? Why not
define const char *name in struct bcma_driver and let driver writers
supply kernel with knowledge on new cores' names rather than hard type
those into the bus code ? Also this will close the question Arend asked
you regarding same core ids with different manufacturer ids.

Have nice day,
George