From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752880AbaCJKjM (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Mar 2014 06:39:12 -0400 Received: from mail-we0-f180.google.com ([74.125.82.180]:42770 "EHLO mail-we0-f180.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752525AbaCJKjK (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Mar 2014 06:39:10 -0400 Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 10:39:05 +0000 From: Lee Jones To: Sachin Kamat Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski , LKML , broonie@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 Resend 2/3] regulator: Add support for S2MPA01 regulator Message-ID: <20140310103905.GK14976@lee--X1> References: <1394100057-32677-1-git-send-email-sachin.kamat@linaro.org> <1394100057-32677-2-git-send-email-sachin.kamat@linaro.org> <1394102406.25853.4.camel@AMDC1943> <20140310093551.GE14976@lee--X1> <20140310103812.GJ14976@lee--X1> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20140310103812.GJ14976@lee--X1> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > >> >> Add support for S2MPA01 voltage and current regulator. > > >> > > >> >> + > > >> >> +struct s2mpa01_info { > > >> >> + struct regulator_dev *rdev[S2MPA01_REGULATOR_MAX]; > > >> > > > >> > Hi, > > >> > > > >> > It seems that s2mpa01_info->rdev is not used anywhere, except as return > > >> > value of devm_regulator_register. I think you can remove it completely. > > >> > > >> Yes. I will send a follow up patch for this. > > > > > > Let's not break things and fix them up later. Fix it in this patch. > > > > Nothing is broken in this patch. What is suggested is just a code cleanup. > > I did not want to disturb the existing patch set as it is already reviewed > > and ready for merging. Anyway I can re-spin with this suggested change. > > > > > > > >> > Beside that, can this driver be merged into existing s2mps11 regulator > > >> > driver? > > >> > > >> Haven't analyzed this yet. Will look into the possibility of consolidation > > >> later. > > > > > > As above. If consolidation is possible it should be take care of in > > > the first instance. > > > > I need to analyze and see if this is really possible and the extent of > > re-usability. > > If possible, this might take a while for me before I start > > implementing it. Considering > > that this patch set is now over 2 months old and consolidations do > > happen subsequently > > I request you to queue this patch set in its current form (with the > > above change if you > > deem it necessary to be part of current patch set). > > I think the suggestion above should be fixed-up. > > Whether to consider consolidation or not is Mark's decision. Oh, Mark (the maintainer) isn't on CC? I think this is a mistake. -- Lee Jones Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog