Russell, > All in all, these changes should have (and have had so far) no > observable impact on the driver; therefore, I do not see any reason > to backport any of these changes to stable trees. Thanks for the detailed explanations. The series looks good to me. There are some checkpatch reports about using "BIT()" and multiline comment style, but I am not pedantic about these. Especially since the overall readabililty of the driver definately gets improved. Where Murphy's Law kicks in, though, is that after 2 years of silence, we had a change in the pxa driver applied in Nov 2019. So, this series doesn't apply on my for-next. Checking against v5.4, the merge conflicts do not look super hard, but also not trivial, so I'd like to ask you if you can rebase the series to v5.5-rc1 or later? I'd rather see this done by someone who has more indepth experience with the driver and HW to test. Thanks, Wolfram
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
