On Sun, Sep 04, 2022 at 06:15:59PM +0200, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > I'm not keen to push unrelated work onto someone doing good stuff > on a driver, but in this particular case it does seem reasonable to > tidy all this up given you are moving the code anyway. Well, even the moving of the code is unrelated to the original goal of adding triggered buffered support and isn't necessary for that. The moving of the code was only to eliminate the use of the "device_index", which was already used in the existing code. I'm of course happy to fix problems with the code I'm actually adding, but it seems to me that it would really be simpler for everyone if the trivial comments (especially the purely cosmetic ones) on the existing, unrelated code would be fixed by the people with the opinions about how the existing code should look like. I don't have any special ability to test the dozen different chips this driver supports, so having me do it by proxy seems rather suboptimal. I can only run it in roadtest, which anyone can do with the following commands (against v5.19 due to the regressions in mainline I mentioned in my other email), without special hardware: git checkout v5.19 git remote add vwax https://github.com/vwax/linux.git git fetch vwax git archive vwax/roadtest/mcp320x tools/testing/roadtest | tar xf - make -C tools/testing/roadtest/ -j24 OPTS="-v -k 'mcp and not trigger'"
