Thanks for the review, Rudolf.
> > +/* -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Hmm as Jim already mentioned I dont know if Jean will like it. On the other hand
> this line is on many places in kernel, but bit shorter, like this:
>
> /*-------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
OK, fix the length (or get rid of them alltogether).
> > + /* voltage (in) registers */
> > + for (ix = 0; ix <= 6; ix++) {
>
> The ARRAY_SIZE idea sounds good to me too.
Yep it is. Will fix it.
> > + /* temp registers */
> > + for (ix = 1; ix <= 7; ix++) {
>
> And Jims proposal for the "get rid of -1" is a good one too. And of course on
> other places too.
Hmm... If you guys feel so strongly about it I'll change it (even
though I still think it's easier to read the way it is now :-).
> > +#define SHOW_TEMP_INPUT 0
> > +#define SHOW_SET_TEMP_MAX 1
> > +#define SHOW_SET_TEMP_MAX_HYST 2
> > +#define SHOW_TEMP_ALARM 3
>
> Jim wrote that he likes the idea, well I'm myself still not convinced.
>
> The classic 2D array grouping is more elegant in term of function, but bit
> strange on the hand of array mapping/dimension.
>
> This case is vice-versa data structures are nice function is bit more
> complicated. I'm not telling you to remove it, but please at least change
> the default case to error and nr to some better name.
OK, I'll fix the default and the nr naming. I still prefer to keep the
combined callbacks, they make the source much smaller and the grouping
of functions for same sensors makes it very easy to read the code.
...juerg
