All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michael Walle <mwalle@kernel.org>
To: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@linaro.org>
Cc: tkuw584924@gmail.com, takahiro.kuwano@infineon.com,
	pratyush@kernel.org, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, bacem.daassi@infineon.com,
	miquel.raynal@bootlin.com, richard@nod.at,
	Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mtd: spi-nor: rename method for enabling or disabling octal DTR
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2023 11:28:53 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <b85368d2e3bf829809344406247193ea@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230714150757.15372-1-tudor.ambarus@linaro.org>

Btw. this was threaded within another thread. At least on the
netdev (and spi) ML this is discouraged.

Am 2023-07-14 17:07, schrieb Tudor Ambarus:
> Having an *_enable(..., bool enable) definition was misleading
> as the method is used both to enable and to disable the octal DTR
> mode. Splitting the method in the core in two, one to enable and
> another to disable the octal DTR mode does not make sense as the
> method is straight forward and we'd introduce code duplication.
> 
> Update the core to use:
> int (*set_octal_dtr)(struct spi_nor *nor, bool enable);
> 
> Manufacturer drivers use different sequences of commands to enable
> and disable the octal DTR mode, thus for clarity they shall
> implement it as:
> static int manufacturer_snor_set_octal_dtr(struct spi_nor *nor, bool 
> enable)
> {
> 	return enable ? manufacturer_snor_octal_dtr_enable() :
> 			manufacturer_snor_octal_dtr_disable();
> }
> 

I don't care much for this naming. I've also seen _enable() functions
which take a bool and then actually disable something in the kernel.

So I'm fine either way:

Reviewed-by: Michael Walle <mwalle@kernel.org>

-michael

______________________________________________________
Linux MTD discussion mailing list
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Michael Walle <mwalle@kernel.org>
To: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@linaro.org>
Cc: tkuw584924@gmail.com, takahiro.kuwano@infineon.com,
	pratyush@kernel.org, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, bacem.daassi@infineon.com,
	miquel.raynal@bootlin.com, richard@nod.at,
	Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mtd: spi-nor: rename method for enabling or disabling octal DTR
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2023 11:28:53 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <b85368d2e3bf829809344406247193ea@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230714150757.15372-1-tudor.ambarus@linaro.org>

Btw. this was threaded within another thread. At least on the
netdev (and spi) ML this is discouraged.

Am 2023-07-14 17:07, schrieb Tudor Ambarus:
> Having an *_enable(..., bool enable) definition was misleading
> as the method is used both to enable and to disable the octal DTR
> mode. Splitting the method in the core in two, one to enable and
> another to disable the octal DTR mode does not make sense as the
> method is straight forward and we'd introduce code duplication.
> 
> Update the core to use:
> int (*set_octal_dtr)(struct spi_nor *nor, bool enable);
> 
> Manufacturer drivers use different sequences of commands to enable
> and disable the octal DTR mode, thus for clarity they shall
> implement it as:
> static int manufacturer_snor_set_octal_dtr(struct spi_nor *nor, bool 
> enable)
> {
> 	return enable ? manufacturer_snor_octal_dtr_enable() :
> 			manufacturer_snor_octal_dtr_disable();
> }
> 

I don't care much for this naming. I've also seen _enable() functions
which take a bool and then actually disable something in the kernel.

So I'm fine either way:

Reviewed-by: Michael Walle <mwalle@kernel.org>

-michael

  reply	other threads:[~2023-07-19  5:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-06-16  5:06 [PATCH] mtd: spi-nor: Make octal_dtr_enable() dedicate for enabling Octal DTR tkuw584924
2023-07-13  6:43 ` Tudor Ambarus
2023-07-14 15:07 ` [PATCH] mtd: spi-nor: rename method for enabling or disabling octal DTR Tudor Ambarus
2023-07-14 15:07   ` Tudor Ambarus
2023-07-18  9:28   ` Michael Walle [this message]
2023-07-18  9:28     ` Michael Walle
2023-07-18 17:43   ` Tudor Ambarus
2023-07-18 17:43     ` Tudor Ambarus

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=b85368d2e3bf829809344406247193ea@kernel.org \
    --to=mwalle@kernel.org \
    --cc=bacem.daassi@infineon.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=miquel.raynal@bootlin.com \
    --cc=pratyush@kernel.org \
    --cc=richard@nod.at \
    --cc=takahiro.kuwano@infineon.com \
    --cc=tkuw584924@gmail.com \
    --cc=tudor.ambarus@linaro.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.