[PATCH] mfd mc13xxx: add MC13892_REVISION_2_4

[Alexander Kurz]

On Thu, 18 Aug 2016, Alexander Shiyan wrote:

> >Четверг, 18 августа 2016, 10:15 +03:00 от Sascha Hauer <s.hauer at pengutronix.de>:
> >
> >On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 03:12:19PM +0200, Alexander Kurz wrote:
> >> An MC13892CJ having REV[4:0]=0x14 can be found in the kindle-d01100.
> >> Add the revision to the list to support this device.
> >> 
> >> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kurz < akurz at blala.de >
> >> ---
> >>  drivers/mfd/mc13xxx.c |  1 +
> >>  include/mfd/mc13xxx.h | 13 +++++++------
> >>  2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> ...
> >>  #define MC13892_REVISION_2_03
> >>  #define MC13892_REVISION_2_0a4
> >>  #define MC13892_REVISION_2_15
> >> -#define MC13892_REVISION_3_06
> >> -#define MC13892_REVISION_3_17
> >> -#define MC13892_REVISION_3_28
> >> -#define MC13892_REVISION_3_2a9
> >> -#define MC13892_REVISION_3_310
> >> -#define MC13892_REVISION_3_511
> >> +#define MC13892_REVISION_2_46
> >> +#define MC13892_REVISION_3_07
> >> +#define MC13892_REVISION_3_18
> >> +#define MC13892_REVISION_3_29
> >> +#define MC13892_REVISION_3_2a10
> >> +#define MC13892_REVISION_3_311
> >> +#define MC13892_REVISION_3_512
> 
> Could this be converted to enum?
Personally I also prefer the enum since it enables e.g. gdb 
awareness on the enum elements, depending on compiler and usecase
it may offer type and value range safety and in this case, the diff
would be smaller.

Is there a coding policy for barebox regarding macros vs. enums?