On Fri, 2019-05-10 at 14:01 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> [External]
>
>
> On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 09:13:26AM +0000, Ardelean, Alexandru wrote:
> > On Wed, 2019-05-08 at 16:26 +0300, Alexandru Ardelean wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2019-05-08 at 15:20 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 02:28:35PM +0300, Alexandru Ardelean wrote:
> > > > > -static const char * const phy_types[] = {
> > > > > - "emmc 5.0 phy",
> > > > > - "emmc 5.1 phy"
> > > > > -};
> > > > > -
> > > > > enum xenon_phy_type_enum {
> > > > > EMMC_5_0_PHY,
> > > > > EMMC_5_1_PHY,
> > > > > NR_PHY_TYPES
> > > >
> > > > There is no need for NR_PHY_TYPES now so you could remove that as
> > > > well.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I thought the same.
> > > The only reason to keep NR_PHY_TYPES, is for potential future
> > > patches,
> > > where it would be just 1 addition
> > >
> > > enum xenon_phy_type_enum {
> > > EMMC_5_0_PHY,
> > > EMMC_5_1_PHY,
> > > + EMMC_5_2_PHY,
> > > NR_PHY_TYPES
> > > }
> > >
> > > Depending on style/preference of how to do enums (allow comma on last
> > > enum
> > > or not allow comma on last enum value), adding new enum values woudl
> > > be 2
> > > additions + 1 deletion lines.
> > >
> > > enum xenon_phy_type_enum {
> > > EMMC_5_0_PHY,
> > > - EMMC_5_1_PHY
> > > + EMM
> > > C_5_1_PHY,
> > > + EMMC_5_2_PHY
> > > }
> > >
> > > Either way (leave NR_PHY_TYPES or remove NR_PHY_TYPES) is fine from
> > > my
> > > side.
> > >
> >
> > Preference on this ?
> > If no objection [nobody insists] I would keep.
> >
> > I don't feel strongly about it [dropping NR_PHY_TYPES or not].
>
> If you end up resending the series could you remove it, but if not then
> it's not worth it.
ack
thanks
Alex
>
> regards,
> dan carpenter
>
