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].
Thanks
Alex
> Thanks
> Alex
>
> > regards,
> > dan carpenter
> >
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
