From: Phong Vo <pvo@apm.com>
To: Jacek Anaszewski <j.anaszewski@samsung.com>
Cc: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Richard Purdie <rpurdie@rpsys.net>,
linux-leds@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, Loc Ho <lho@apm.com>,
Thang Nguyen <tqnguyen@apm.com>, patches <patches@apm.com>,
Tin Huynh <tnhuynh@apm.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH V3] leds: pca955x: Add ACPI support for pca955x
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 15:23:45 +0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <dc989a8b92342d2ceb63381ae9dc019d@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c1d0e813-9e1e-b387-735a-2c8f39c5308e@samsung.com>
+-----Original Message-----
+From: Jacek Anaszewski [mailto:j.anaszewski@samsung.com]
+Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2016 3:18 PM
+To: Tin Huynh
+Cc: Mika Westerberg; Rafael J. Wysocki; Richard Purdie; linux-
+leds@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-
+acpi@vger.kernel.org; Loc Ho; Thang Nguyen; Phong Vo; patches
+Subject: Re: [PATCH V3] leds: pca955x: Add ACPI support for pca955x
+
+On 11/30/2016 09:06 AM, Tin Huynh wrote:
+> On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 3:01 PM, Jacek Anaszewski
+> <j.anaszewski@samsung.com> wrote:
+>>
+>> On 11/30/2016 08:51 AM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
+>>>
+>>> Hi Tin,
+>>>
+>>> How this patch is different from the one already merged?
+>>>
+>>> Best regards,
+>>> Jacek Anaszewski
+>>>
Hi Jacek, I am answering on behalf of Tin.
This patch is for the leds:pca955x driver while the previous one was for
leds:pca963x driver!
They are almost the same in the coding construct, but different drivers.
+>>> On 11/30/2016 04:08 AM, Tin Huynh wrote:
+>>>>
+>>>> This patch enables ACPI support for leds-pca955x driver.
+>>>>
+>>>> Signed-off-by: Tin Huynh <tnhuynh@apm.com>
+>>>> ---
+>>>> drivers/leds/leds-pca955x.c | 22 +++++++++++++++++++++-
+>>>> 1 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
+>>>>
+>>>> Change from V2:
+>>>> -Correct coding conventions.
+>>>>
+>>>> Change from V1:
+>>>> -Remove CONFIG_ACPI.
+>>>>
+>>>> diff --git a/drivers/leds/leds-pca955x.c
+>>>> b/drivers/leds/leds-pca955x.c index 840401a..b168ebe 100644
+>>>> --- a/drivers/leds/leds-pca955x.c
+>>>> +++ b/drivers/leds/leds-pca955x.c
+>>>> @@ -40,6 +40,7 @@
+>>>> * bits the chip supports.
+>>>> */
+>>>>
+>>>> +#include <linux/acpi.h>
+>>>> #include <linux/module.h>
+>>>> #include <linux/delay.h>
+>>>> #include <linux/string.h>
+>>>> @@ -100,6 +101,15 @@ struct pca955x_chipdef { };
+>>>> MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(i2c, pca955x_id);
+>>>>
+>>>> +static const struct acpi_device_id pca955x_acpi_ids[] = {
+>>>> + { .id = "PCA9550", .driver_data = pca9550 },
+>>>> + { .id = "PCA9551", .driver_data = pca9551 },
+>>>> + { .id = "PCA9552", .driver_data = pca9552 },
+>>>> + { .id = "PCA9553", .driver_data = pca9553 },
+>>>> + { }
+>>
+>>
+>> OK, I see that you brought back explicit properties in the structure
+>> initializer. Is there some vital reason for that?
It's not vital, but to make it consistent with what was done for pca963x,
and also per suggestion by Mika on reviewing a different driver mux:954x in
another thread.
I would think this would make the definition clearer.
+>> You're mentioning "correcting coding conventions" in the patch
+>> changelog. checkpatch.pl --strict doesn't complain about that, so
+>> what coding conventions you have on mind?
+>
+>
+>>
+>>
+>>>> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, pca955x_acpi_ids);
+>>>> +
+>>>> struct pca955x {
+>>>> struct mutex lock;
+>>>> struct pca955x_led *leds;
+>>>> @@ -250,7 +260,16 @@ static int pca955x_probe(struct i2c_client
+*client,
+>>>> struct led_platform_data *pdata;
+>>>> int i, err;
+>>>>
+>>>> - chip = &pca955x_chipdefs[id->driver_data];
+>>>> + if (id) {
+>>>> + chip = &pca955x_chipdefs[id->driver_data];
+>>>> + } else {
+>>>> + const struct acpi_device_id *acpi_id;
+>
+> I added '{}' follow if
+
+You had it already in V1. Please verify if the patch applied to the for-
+next branch of linux-leds.git has the shape you intended:
+
+https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/j.anaszewski/linux-
+leds.git/commit/?h=for-next&id=e46895b71a26da404c4d95cb2bab1a67cf8b20bc
+
+--
+Best regards,
+Jacek Anaszewski
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-11-30 8:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CGME20161130030845epcas5p2369d1c7cabb765ef0039b8e8d5aaa965@epcas5p2.samsung.com>
2016-11-30 3:08 ` [PATCH V3] leds: pca955x: Add ACPI support for pca955x Tin Huynh
2016-11-30 7:51 ` Jacek Anaszewski
2016-11-30 8:01 ` Jacek Anaszewski
2016-11-30 8:06 ` Tin Huynh
2016-11-30 8:17 ` Jacek Anaszewski
2016-11-30 8:23 ` Phong Vo [this message]
2016-11-30 9:00 ` Jacek Anaszewski
2016-11-30 9:10 ` Phong Vo
2016-11-30 9:27 ` Jacek Anaszewski
2016-11-30 9:36 ` Peter Rosin
2016-11-30 9:36 ` Peter Rosin
2016-11-30 9:58 ` Jacek Anaszewski
2016-11-30 10:01 ` Mika Westerberg
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=dc989a8b92342d2ceb63381ae9dc019d@mail.gmail.com \
--to=pvo@apm.com \
--cc=j.anaszewski@samsung.com \
--cc=lho@apm.com \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-leds@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com \
--cc=patches@apm.com \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=rpurdie@rpsys.net \
--cc=tnhuynh@apm.com \
--cc=tqnguyen@apm.com \
/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.