Hi! > > > --- /dev/null > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/mellanox,mlxreg-core > > > @@ -0,0 +1,347 @@ > > > +Mellanox programmable device control. > > > +------------------------------------- > > > +This binding defines the device control interface over I2C bus for > > > +Mellanox BMC based switches. > > > > You'll need to cc dt maintainers here. > > Hi Pavel, > > Thank you very much for review. > > I have in to: Rob Herring and in c: devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Aha, sorry, did not notice that. > Should it be separate mail, or it's OK? They prefer separate mails, yes. > > > + for (i = 0; i < priv->item[grp->type]->count; i++, id++, data++) { > > > + priv->mlxreg_core_attr[id] = > > > + &priv- > > >mlxreg_core_dev_attr[id].dev_attr.attr; > > > + if (grp->use_grp_name) > > > + priv->mlxreg_core_attr[id]->name = > > > + devm_kasprintf(priv->dev, GFP_KERNEL, > > > + "%s%u", grp->name, id % > > > + priv->item[grp->type]- > > >count > > > + + 1); > > > + else > > > + priv->mlxreg_core_attr[id]->name = > > > + devm_kasprintf(priv->dev, GFP_KERNEL, > > > + data->label); > > > > Is it really neccessary to dynamically generate it? Static table could be > > simpler... > > But I don't know how many groups and attributes can be defined for particular device. > On the system I am working on know I have four programmable device with different purposes and different set of attributes. > I guess that's good reason. But if you could make that code simpler / easier to follow, it would be nice. Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature