On Wed, Jun 07, 2023 at 04:14:39PM +0800, Walker Chen wrote:
> Some minor issues were found during addtional testing and static
> analysis. The patch fixed these minor issues.
> 1.Use BIT() macro to indicate configuration for TDM registers.
>
> 2.Fix the check for devm_reset_control_array_get_exclusive return
> value. The devm_reset_control_array_get_exclusive() function may return
> NULL if it's an optional request. If optional is intended then NULL
> should not be treated as an error case, but as a special kind of success
> case. So here the IS_ERR() is used to check better.
As covered in submitting-patches.rst please submit one patch per change
rather than combining multiple changes into a single patch, it makes
things much easier to review and handle.
> - datarx = (tdm->rx.ifl << IFL_BIT) |
> - (tdm->rx.wl << WL_BIT) |
> - (tdm->rx.sscale << SSCALE_BIT) |
> - (tdm->rx.sl << SL_BIT) |
> - (tdm->rx.lrj << LRJ_BIT);
> + datarx = (tdm->rxwl << 8) |
> + (tdm->rxsscale << 4) |
> + (tdm->rxsl << 2) |
> + TDM_PCMRXCR_LEFT_J;
I'm not sure this change to use numbers here is a win - the _BIT
definitions look fine (I might've called them _SHIFT but whatever).
> -static const struct of_device_id jh7110_tdm_of_match[] = {
> +static const struct of_device_id jh7110_tdm_match[] = {
> { .compatible = "starfive,jh7110-tdm", },
> {}
> };
>
> -MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, jh7110_tdm_of_match);
> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, jh7110_tdm_match);
This rename wasn't mentioned in the changelog.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
