Hi , >-----Original Message----- >From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx> >Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2020 10:55 PM >To: Zulkifli, Muhammad Husaini <muhammad.husaini.zulkifli@xxxxxxxxx> >Cc: Michal Simek <michal.simek@xxxxxxxxxx>; Hunter, Adrian ><adrian.hunter@xxxxxxxxx>; Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@xxxxxxx>; Ulf >Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx>; linux-mmc <linux-mmc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; >linux-arm Mailing List <linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Linux Kernel >Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Raja Subramanian, Lakshmi Bai ><lakshmi.bai.raja.subramanian@xxxxxxxxx>; Wan Mohamad, Wan Ahmad Zainie ><wan.ahmad.zainie.wan.mohamad@xxxxxxxxx>; Arnd Bergmann ><arnd@xxxxxxxx> >Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] mmc: sdhci-of-arasan: Enable UHS-1 support for >Keem Bay SOC > >On Wed, Oct 7, 2020 at 4:28 PM Zulkifli, Muhammad Husaini ><muhammad.husaini.zulkifli@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx> >> >Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2020 4:56 PM On Wed, Oct 7, 2020 at 11:38 >> >AM Michal Simek <michal.simek@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >wrote: >> >> On 06. 10. 20 17:55, muhammad.husaini.zulkifli@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > >... > >> >> > + struct device *dev = &pdev->dev; >> >> >> >> nit: I got this but as I see 3 lines below maybe would be better to >> >> use it everywhere but it can be done in separate patch. >> > >> >In that case I think it would be better to have that patch first. It >> >make follow up code cleaner. >> I want to get some clarification here. > >> Do I need a separate patch for this struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;? > >It should be a separate patch and better your series starts with it, so it won't >interfere with new code. > >> Can I embedded together with UHS patch? > >Better to avoid merging orthogonal things together in one change. Noted. Thanks 😉 > >-- >With Best Regards, >Andy Shevchenko
