On Wed, Dec 15, 2021 at 09:51:10AM +0200, Jarkko Nikula wrote:
> On 12/13/21 20:00, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > Use temporary variable for struct device to make code neater.
...
> > + dev->suspended = true;
> > + dev->disable(dev);
> In my opinion this brings more mess than removes. If I see dev->something
> I'll immediatelly think "struct device" and get confused. x_dev->something
> or dev_y->something not so much. And this change adds in my opinion more
> confusion than removes.
Either way it will be inconsistent. If you wish to fix, I can build something
on top of your fix, but currently I drop this patch.
> > if (id->driver_data >= ARRAY_SIZE(dw_pci_controllers)) {
> > - dev_err(&pdev->dev, "%s: invalid driver data %ld\n", __func__,
> > - id->driver_data);
> > + dev_err(d, "%s: invalid driver data %ld\n", __func__, id->driver_data);
> > return -EINVAL;
>
> Honestly, what's is the value of this change?
What is the value of the changes in general? :-)
> Yet another differently named
> "device" pointer more to the mess (Inconsistent naming use of struct
> dw_i2c_dev *dev, struct dw_i2c_dev *i_dev and struct device *dev in the
> i2c-designware-*).
As I said, please fix this inconsistency yourself how you find it better
and I will use that in the future contributions.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
