Hi Jonathan,
On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 18:26:20 +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> I have a couple of parts I can test this on (connected to a pxa271)
> but it may be a little while before I get to it (so don't let me
> hold the patch up!)
That would be great. You can always get the latest version of the patch
either in my i2c tree or in linux-next.
> On tiny point below. Worth changing if you are doing another roll of the patch
> as at least in my dozy Monday evening state it confused me for a few moments!
> ...
> > --- /dev/null 1970-01-01 00:00:00.000000000 +0000
> > +++ linux-2.6.33-rc7/drivers/i2c/i2c-smbus.c 2010-02-12 16:11:34.000000000 +0100
> ...
> > +/*
> > + * The alert IRQ handler needs to hand work off to a task which can issue
> > + * SMBus calls, because those sleeping calls can't be made in IRQ context.
> > + */
> > +static void smbus_alert(struct work_struct *work)
> > +{
> > + struct i2c_smbus_alert *data;
> > + struct i2c_client *ara;
> > + unsigned short prev_addr = 0; /* Not a valid address */
> > +
> > + data = container_of(work, struct i2c_smbus_alert, alert);
> > + ara = data->ara;
> > +
> > + for (;;) {
> > + s32 status;
> > + struct alert_data data;
> Can we change the name of data here. From readability point of view it
> would be better not to have this reliance on scope (as data used for
> struct i2c_smbus_alert *data above. (obviously changing it above would
> work as well!)
Oh, yeah, of course. Thanks for pointing this out. I wish we built the
kernel with -Wshadow so that gcc could tell us automatically...
I have changed all instances of struct i2c_smbus_alert * to name
"alert", this solves the problem and should make the code more
consistent and readable.
Thanks!
--
Jean Delvare
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
