[PATCH V3 08/11] soc: mediatek: PMIC wrap: remove pwrap_is_mt8135() and pwrap_is_mt8173()

Matthias Brugger matthias.bgg at gmail.com
Mon Feb 1 03:27:52 PST 2016



On 01/02/16 12:15, John Crispin wrote:
>
>
> On 01/02/2016 12:11, Matthias Brugger wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 01/02/16 12:00, John Crispin wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 01/02/2016 11:55, Matthias Brugger wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 25/01/16 10:53, John Crispin wrote:
>>>>> With ore SoCs being added the list of helper functions like these would
>>>>
>>>> The commit message is something strange:
>>>> "With every new SoC being added..." maybe?
>>>>
>>>>> grow. While at it also add a new flag "bridge" and use that insted of
>>>>
>>>> s/insted/instead
>>>>
>>>>> pwrap_is_mt8173() where appropriate.
>>>
>>> you are lookign at V3 of the series, V4 has this fix done already
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>
>>>>>         }
>>>>> @@ -830,6 +824,7 @@ static struct pmic_wrapper_type pwrap_mt8135 = {
>>>>>         .int_en_all = BIT(31) | BIT(1),
>>>>>         .spi_w = PWRAP_MAN_CMD_SPI_WRITE,
>>>>>         .wdt_src = PWRAP_WDT_SRC_MASK_ALL,
>>>>> +    .has_bridge = 1,
>>>>>         .init_reg_clock = pwrap_mt8135_init_reg_clock,
>>>>>         .init_special = pwrap_mt8135_init_special,
>>>>>     };
>>>>
>>>> Please set has_bridge explicitly for mt8173.
>>>
>>> I dont get it. the original code never did that.
>>>
>>
>> has_bridge was introduced by this patch, but you don't set it explicitly
>> to 0 in pwrap_mt8173.
>>
>> Just as I see it, please try to write a summary to every new version of
>> a patch set which explains what you changed between one version and
>> another. This will help a lot making the review easier.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Matthias
>>
>
>
> You missed the "to zero" part before. now the comment makes sense. I can
> set it to 0 if it is more obvious for you in that case.
>
> general consent is to not declare statics to 0. check_patch.pl will
> actually complain about those declarations. that is why i was confused.

If that's the case, then we accept the authority of check_patch.pl ;)
I didn't know that, so just leave has_bridge as it was.

Regards,
Matthias



More information about the Linux-mediatek mailing list