From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43555)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <peter.maydell@linaro.org>) id 1XOUVX-0005FC-Dg
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 01 Sep 2014 12:31:13 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <peter.maydell@linaro.org>) id 1XOUVR-0002uW-F1
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 01 Sep 2014 12:31:07 -0400
Received: from mail-la0-f43.google.com ([209.85.215.43]:45347)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <peter.maydell@linaro.org>) id 1XOUVR-0002uJ-8O
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 01 Sep 2014 12:31:01 -0400
Received: by mail-la0-f43.google.com with SMTP id ty20so6403507lab.16
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Mon, 01 Sep 2014 09:31:00 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAEgOgz5ZpV4=P9NhhnhvCo-XmNhA6m6P6+QuqiZiN3EM=-d_gw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <cover.1408838440.git.alistair23@gmail.com>
	<eab86464bb6cf6638da9785cd9253f78a1962cce.1408838440.git.alistair23@gmail.com>
	<CAEgOgz5ZpV4=P9NhhnhvCo-XmNhA6m6P6+QuqiZiN3EM=-d_gw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2014 17:30:40 +0100
Message-ID: <CAFEAcA9hexD8KpEqwZLJqShwapHrntpihuDYPUn_LfU6TCucpA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v1 1/5] Netduino_USART: Add the Netduino
 Plus 2 USART Controller
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Peter Crosthwaite <peter.crosthwaite@xilinx.com>
Cc: Alistair Francis <alistair23@gmail.com>, "qemu-devel@nongnu.org Developers" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, Konstanty Bialkowski <konstanty@ieee.org>

On 24 August 2014 03:09, Peter Crosthwaite <peter.crosthwaite@xilinx.com> wrote:
> If you make your registers an array, you can index the with the offset
> and remove the repeated s->foo return logic. You can also use a single
> memset to do all the 0 resets.

Hmm. I dislike that style personally, especially for devices
like this which only have a handful of registers.

-- PMM