On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 1:08 AM, Dan Murphy <dmurphy@xxxxxx> wrote:
> On 05/15/2018 04:56 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 6:43 PM, Dan Murphy <dmurphy@xxxxxx> wrote:
>>> + depends on LEDS_CLASS && I2C && OF
>>
>> What is OF specific in this driver?
>
> as3645a_led_class_setup has a "of" dependency
So what? Is it called from this driver or?
>>> +static const struct lm3601x_max_timeouts strobe_timeouts[] = {
>>> + { 40000, 0x00 },
>>> + { 80000, 0x01 },
>>> + { 120000, 0x02 },
>>> + { 160000, 0x03 },
>>> + { 200000, 0x04 },
>>> + { 240000, 0x05 },
>>> + { 280000, 0x06 },
>>> + { 320000, 0x07 },
>>> + { 360000, 0x08 },
>>> + { 400000, 0x09 },
>>> + { 600000, 0x0a },
>>> + { 800000, 0x0b },
>>> + { 1000000, 0x0c },
>>> + { 1200000, 0x0d },
>>> + { 1400000, 0x0e },
>>> + { 1600000, 0x0f },
>>
>> Huh?!
>
> Please give comments that actually mean something other wise I will opt to ignore them.
I did below.
>> strobe_timeout = (x + 1) * 40 * MSECS_IN_SEC;
>
> Not sure what equation you are trying to point out here. But if you are trying to apply
> a timeout step you cannot do this with this part. As pointed out in the DT doc the timeout
> step is not linear.
Yeah, I know people are more than often too lazy to think.
if (x < 9)
strobe_timeout = (x + 1) * 40 * MSECS_IN_SEC;
else
strobe_timeout = (400 + (x - 9) * 200) * MSECS_IN_SEC;
>>> + brightness_val = (brightness/2);
>>
>> Spaces.
>
> Not sure what this means checkpatch was clean
Even besides missed whispaces it has redundant parens.
checkpatch is not a silver bullet to get your code clean and nice.
>> This is return led_...();
>
> That is a preference. It does not have to be that way.
What do you mean? We do not appreciate +LOCs for no (or even nagative!) benefit.
>>> + ret = of_property_read_string(led->led_node, "label", &name);
>>
>> device_property_...();
>
> It can be if the maintainer is requesting this.
Jacek, if you need rationale behind this comment it's here: the driver
has nothing DT specific and getting rid of OF centric programming
allows to reuse the driver on non-DT platforms w/o touching a source
code.
> Is the trend to move to these functions?
See above.
> Most drivers use the "of" calls.
So what?
>>> + if (!ret)
>>
>> if (ret) sounds more natural. And better just to split
>>
>>> + snprintf(led->led_name, sizeof(led->led_name),
>>> + "%s:%s", led->led_node->name, name);
>>> + else
>>> + snprintf(led->led_name, sizeof(led->led_name),
>>> + "%s:torch", led->led_node->name);
>>
>> const char *tmp;
>>
>> ret = device_property_read_...(&tmp);
>> if (ret)
>> tmp = ...
>> sprintf(...);
No comments on this?
>>> + led = devm_kzalloc(&client->dev,
>>> + sizeof(struct lm3601x_led), GFP_KERNEL);
>>
>> sizeof(*led) and one line in the result
And this?
>>> + { },
>>
>> Terminators better w/o comma.
>
> Looking at other drivers adding comma's on the sentinel is accepted. See the as3645a driver
So what?
Terminator at compile time even better.
>>> + {},
>>
>> Ditto.
>
> See above
See above.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
