Re: [PATCH 1/4] extcon: arizona: Add defines for microphone detection levels

[Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@samsung.com>]

On 11/11/2013 08:15 PM, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Nov 2013, Charles Keepax wrote:
> 
>> On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 10:53:56AM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
>>>> On 11/08/2013 10:19 PM, Charles Keepax wrote:
>>>>> Improve readability by creating a define for each microphone detection
>>>>> level.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Charles Keepax <ckeepax@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>  drivers/extcon/extcon-arizona.c       |   21 ++++++++++++++++-----
>>>>>  include/linux/mfd/arizona/registers.h |    9 +++++++++
>>>>>  2 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/extcon/extcon-arizona.c b/drivers/extcon/extcon-arizona.c
>>>>> index 3c55ec8..6d914ba 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/extcon/extcon-arizona.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/extcon/extcon-arizona.c
>>>>> @@ -44,6 +44,17 @@
>>>>>  #define HPDET_DEBOUNCE 500
>>>>>  #define DEFAULT_MICD_TIMEOUT 2000
>>>>>  
>>>>> +enum {
>>>>> +	MICD_LVL_1_TO_7 = ARIZONA_MICD_LVL_1 | ARIZONA_MICD_LVL_2 |
>>>>> +			  ARIZONA_MICD_LVL_3 | ARIZONA_MICD_LVL_4 |
>>>>> +			  ARIZONA_MICD_LVL_5 | ARIZONA_MICD_LVL_6 |
>>>>> +			  ARIZONA_MICD_LVL_7,
>>>>> +
>>>>> +	MICD_LVL_0_TO_7 = ARIZONA_MICD_LVL_0 | MICD_LVL_1_TO_7,
>>>>> +
>>>>> +	MICD_LVL_0_TO_8 = MICD_LVL_0_TO_7 | ARIZONA_MICD_LVL_8,
>>>>> +};
>>>>
>>>> MICD_LVL_1_TO_7 / MICD_LVL_0_TO_7 /MICD_LVL_0_TO_8 haven't the sequential value.
>>>> I prefer '#define' keyword to define MICD_LVL_1_TO_7 / MICD_LVL_0_TO_7 /MICD_LVL_0_TO_8
>>>> instead of enum keyword.
>>
>>
>> I will do an incremental patch to update them to defines.
>>
>>
>>> Actually Charles has already sent me this patch and I applied it a
>>> while ago.
>>>
>>> I'm inclined to agree with you though, so if you want to send a patch
>>> based on v3.14-rc1 I'd be happy to accept it.
>>
>> Apologies for causing confusion here I checked your tree for the
>> patch and didn't see it, so I assumed you had decided not to
>> apply it. I must have missed it some how.
> 
> So I am partly to blame here. My public repos sometimes aren't as
> up-to-date and my private ones, but if I've replied to a patch and
> said I've applied it, I inevitably have.
> 

But this patch has only the dependency of extcon subsystem.
At least, you have to get 'Acked-by' or 'Signed-off-by' from
subsystem maintainer. I didn't agree applying this patch on mainline tree.