On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 09:13:26AM +0000, Ardelean, Alexandru wrote:
> On Wed, 2019-05-08 at 16:26 +0300, Alexandru Ardelean wrote:
> > On Wed, 2019-05-08 at 15:20 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 02:28:35PM +0300, Alexandru Ardelean wrote:
> > > > -static const char * const phy_types[] = {
> > > > - "emmc 5.0 phy",
> > > > - "emmc 5.1 phy"
> > > > -};
> > > > -
> > > > enum xenon_phy_type_enum {
> > > > EMMC_5_0_PHY,
> > > > EMMC_5_1_PHY,
> > > > NR_PHY_TYPES
> > >
> > > There is no need for NR_PHY_TYPES now so you could remove that as well.
> > >
> >
> > I thought the same.
> > The only reason to keep NR_PHY_TYPES, is for potential future patches,
> > where it would be just 1 addition
> >
> > enum xenon_phy_type_enum {
> > EMMC_5_0_PHY,
> > EMMC_5_1_PHY,
> > + EMMC_5_2_PHY,
> > NR_PHY_TYPES
> > }
> >
> > Depending on style/preference of how to do enums (allow comma on last
> > enum
> > or not allow comma on last enum value), adding new enum values woudl be 2
> > additions + 1 deletion lines.
> >
> > enum xenon_phy_type_enum {
> > EMMC_5_0_PHY,
> > - EMMC_5_1_PHY
> > + EMM
> > C_5_1_PHY,
> > + EMMC_5_2_PHY
> > }
> >
> > Either way (leave NR_PHY_TYPES or remove NR_PHY_TYPES) is fine from my
> > side.
> >
>
> Preference on this ?
> If no objection [nobody insists] I would keep.
>
> I don't feel strongly about it [dropping NR_PHY_TYPES or not].
If you end up resending the series could you remove it, but if not then
it's not worth it.
regards,
dan carpenter
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
