Hi Sven,
On Fri, Dec 01, 2017 at 10:20:41AM -0500, Sven Van Asbroeck wrote:
> Thank you, it fixes the issue on the multi-address eeprom that I have access to.
>
> Tested-by: Sven Van Asbroeck on a 24AA16/24LC16B <svendev@xxxxxxxx>
>
> One very minor remark:
>
> + struct device *dev = &at24->client[0]->dev;
>
> It is sufficiently clear to others (and us a few months down the line)
> why we are
> using only client[0] for power management? Could it benefit from a separate
> function with comments?
>
> struct device *dev = get_pm_device(at24);
>
> static struct device *get_pm_device(struct at24_data *at24)
> {
> /* explain why we use client[0] and not any of the dummies */
> return &at24->client[0]->dev;
> }
There are no comments in assigning at24->client[0] either (or a helper
function). I think it should be rather evident when looking at the code
when you think about it. I certainly don't object adding a comment if you
insist or someone else thinks it's a good idea.
Thanks for testing!
--
Kind regards,
Sakari Ailus
sakari.ailus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
