Mark Brown wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 01, 2010 at 06:44:11PM +0900, Kukjin Kim wrote:
>
> > MM...but I'm not sure if I can submit other patch for max8952...
> > Actually, Mr. Ham's max8952 code has been applied by Liam.
>
> We can always remove that if it makes more sense to combine the code.
>
> > - return (MAX8649_DCDC_VMIN + index * MAX8649_DCDC_STEP);
> > + struct max8649_regulator_info *info = rdev_get_drvdata(rdev);
> > + int ret = MAX8649_DCDC_VMIN + index * MAX8649_DCDC_STEP;
> > +
> > + if (!strcmp(info->i2c->name, "max8952"))
>
> Rather than doing a strcmp on the name you should use the id field here:
>
Ok..will fix it.
> > static const struct i2c_device_id max8649_id[] = {
> > { "max8649", 0 },
> > + { "max8952", 0 },
> > { }
> > };
>
> to pass in a value which you compare against. While it's probably not a
> performance issue on this chip this is much clearer and more idiomatic.
Thanks for your review and suggestion.
Will submit as per your comments.
Thanks.
Best regards,
Kgene.
--
Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Senior Engineer,
SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
