From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-path: <mchehab@pedra>
Received: from smtp6-g21.free.fr ([212.27.42.6]:40786 "EHLO smtp6-g21.free.fr"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1753834Ab1FFUVK (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-media@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 6 Jun 2011 16:21:10 -0400
Message-ID: <4DED36A8.5000300@free.fr>
Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2011 22:20:56 +0200
From: Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@free.fr>
Reply-To: robert.jarzmik@free.fr
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@gmx.de>
CC: Linux Media Mailing List <linux-media@vger.kernel.org>,
	=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Teresa_G=E1mez?= <t.gamez@phytec.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] V4L: mt9m111: propagate higher level abstraction
 down in functions
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1106061918010.11169@axis700.grange>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1106061918010.11169@axis700.grange>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
List-ID: <linux-media.vger.kernel.org>
Sender: <mchehab@pedra>

On 06/06/2011 07:20 PM, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> It is more convenient to propagate the higher level abstraction - the
> struct mt9m111 object into functions and then retrieve a pointer to
> the i2c client, if needed, than to do the reverse.
Agreed.

One minor point, you ofter replace :
 > -	struct mt9m111 *mt9m111 = to_mt9m111(client);
 > +	struct mt9m111 *mt9m111 = container_of(sd, struct mt9m111, subdev);

Why haven't you replaced the signature of to_mt9m111() into :
static struct mt9m111 *to_mt9m111(const struct v4l2_subdev *sd)
{
	return container_of(sd, struct mt9m111, subdev);
}

This way, each to_mt9m111(client) will become to_mt9m111(sd), and the 
purpose of to_mt9m111() will be kept. Wouldn't that be better ?

Else I agree with everything else.

Cheers.

--
Robert