Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] regmap: redefined regmap_read_poll_timeout to simplify code

[Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>]

> use read_poll_timeout macro to redefined regmap_read_poll_timeout
> and also remove the duplicate code.

How do you think about a wording variant like the following?

   Subject:
   [PATCH 1/2] regmap: Simplify implementation of the regmap_read_poll_timeout() macro

   Change description:
   Simplify the implementation of the macro “regmap_read_poll_timeout”
   by using the macro “read_poll_timeout”.


…
> +++ b/include/linux/regmap.h
…
> @@ -122,26 +123,10 @@ struct reg_sequence {
>   */
>  #define regmap_read_poll_timeout(map, addr, val, cond, sleep_us, timeout_us) \
>  ({ \
…
> +	int __ret, __tmp; \
> +	__tmp = read_poll_timeout(regmap_read, __ret, __ret || (cond), \
> +			sleep_us, timeout_us, false, (map), (addr), &(val)); \
> +	__ret ?: __tmp; \
>  })

* Can this macro work also with variable names which do not contain
  double underscores?

* Can the tag “Fixes” be relevant for such an adjustment?

Regards,
Markus