On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 09:21:47PM +0530, Rohit K Bharadwaj wrote:
> On 24/07/20 7:39 pm, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 10:06:34AM +0530, Rohit K Bharadwaj wrote:
> >> @@ -784,7 +784,7 @@ static int tegra_nvec_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >> platform_set_drvdata(pdev, nvec);
> >> nvec->dev = dev;
> >>
> >> - if (of_property_read_u32(dev->of_node, "slave-addr", &nvec->i2c_addr)) {
> >> + if (of_property_read_u32(dev->of_node, "secondary-addr", &nvec->i2c_addr)) {
> >
> > Sorry, I should have looked for v3 at the start to reply to it. This
> > line will break the driver.
> >
> > regards,
> > dan carpenter
> >
>
> Thank you for your review sir, my intention was to fix kernel coding style issues and hence had picked this one.
> Could you please let me know whether I should undo that particular line and submit the patch again so as not to break the driver?
Try making patches that do not break things :)
Maybe a different type of patch?
thanks,
greg k-h
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
