Thanks for the review Andy
On 8/20/22 02:30, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 10:21 PM Matti Vaittinen
> <mazziesaccount@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> Use devm_regulator_bulk_get_enable() instead of open coded bulk-get,
>> bulk-enable, add-action-to-disable-at-detach - pattern.
>
> ...
>
>> int bmg160_core_probe(struct device *dev, struct regmap *regmap, int irq,
>> const char *name)
>> {
>> struct bmg160_data *data;
>> struct iio_dev *indio_dev;
>> int ret;
>> + static const char * const regulators[] = {"vdd", "vddio"};
>
> Please, keep this following the "longest line first" rule. Note, in
This was not following the (IMO slightly silly) rule even prior my
patch. I can for sure move my line up - but that won't give you the
"reverse X-mas tree".
I don't have any real objections on changing the styling though - I
don't expect this to be merged before the dependency is in rc1 - so I
guess I will anyways need to respin this for next cycle. I can do the
styling then.
> this case you even can move it out of the function, so we will see
> clearly that this is (not a hidden) global variable.
Here I do disagree with you. Moving the array out of the function makes
it _much_ less obvious it is not used outside this function. Reason for
making is "static const" is to allow the data be placed in read-only
area (thanks to Guenter who originally gave me this tip).
> P.S. Same applies for the rest of the similar places in your series.
>
Br,
-- Matti
--
The Linux Kernel guy at ROHM Semiconductors
Matti Vaittinen, Linux device drivers
ROHM Semiconductors, Finland SWDC
Kiviharjunlenkki 1E
90220 OULU
FINLAND
~~ this year is the year of a signature writers block ~~
