Hi Wei, On Mon, 29 Jul 2013 19:15:12 +0800, Wei Ni wrote: > On 07/27/2013 11:38 PM, Jean Delvare wrote: > > On Fri, 12 Jul 2013 15:48:07 +0800, Wei Ni wrote: > >> +/* > >> + * TEMP11 register index > >> + */ > >> +enum lm90_temp11_reg_index { > >> + TEMP11_REMOTE_TEMP = 0, /* 0: remote input */ > >> + TEMP11_REMOTE_LOW, /* 1: remote low limit */ > >> + TEMP11_REMOTE_HIGH, /* 2: remote high limit */ > >> + TEMP11_REMOTE_OFFSET, /* 3: remote offset > >> + * (except max6646, max6657/58/59, > >> + * and max6695/96) > >> + */ > >> + TEMP11_LOCAL_TEMP, /* 4: local input */ > >> + TEMP11_REMOTE2_TEMP, /* 5: remote 2 input (max6695/96 only) */ > >> + TEMP11_REMOTE2_LOW, /* 6: remote 2 low limit (max6695/96 only) */ > >> + TEMP11_REMOTE2_HIGH, /* 7: remote 2 high limit (max6695/96 only) */ > >> + TEMP11_REG_NUM > >> +}; > > (...) > > Also, the comments are mostly useless now, they were there to document > > what each number was referring to, but now this is exactly what the new > > constants are doing. > > Yes, we can remove these comments, but I think it's better to remain > those exception and only things. Yes, I agree. > >> + > >> +/* > >> + * TEMP11 register NR > >> + */ > >> +enum lm90_temp11_reg_nr { > >> + NR_CHAN_0_REMOTE_LOW = 0, /* 0: channel 0, remote low limit */ > >> + NR_CHAN_0_REMOTE_HIGH, /* 1: channel 0, remote high limit */ > >> + NR_CHAN_0_REMOTE_OFFSET, /* 2: channel 0, remote offset */ > >> + NR_CHAN_1_REMOTE_LOW, /* 3: channel 1, remote low limit */ > >> + NR_CHAN_1_REMOTE_HIGH, /* 4: channel 1, remote high limit */ > > > > The conventions used in the descriptions diverge from the ones used > > above. "channel 0 remote" here is just "remove" above, and "channel 1 > > remote" is "remote 2" above. This is quite confusing. > > > >> + NR_NUM /* number of the NRs for temp11 */ > > > > The fact that you were unable to come up with a proper name for this > > number is a clear indication that this enum should not exist in the > > first place. > > > > These numbers are used only once, to pass specific information to > > set_temp11. This was easy enough when these were just numbers and I > > really had no reason not to do that. > > Ok, so how about to remove these changes, and keep the original codes to > use numbers. Fine with me. We can always change the code later to use the TEMP11 index values instead if anyone cares, this can be done separately. -- Jean Delvare -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html