From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: marex@denx.de (Marek Vasut) Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2013 02:02:43 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 2/5] spi/mxs: Fix chip select control bits in DMA mode In-Reply-To: References: <1364570381-17605-1-git-send-email-tpiepho@gmail.com> <201304020130.51951.marex@denx.de> Message-ID: <201304020202.43501.marex@denx.de> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Dear Trent Piepho, > On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 4:30 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: > >> >> -static uint32_t mxs_spi_cs_to_reg(unsigned cs) > >> >> +static u32 mxs_spi_cs_to_reg(unsigned cs) > >> >> > >> >> { > >> >> > >> >> - uint32_t select = 0; > >> >> + u32 select = 0; > >> > >> I'll make it a separate patch. > > > > This is completely irrelevant change, please just submit the relevant > > patches. > > Kernel code should use u16, u32, etc. instead of the uint16_t, > uint32_t types. The rest of the driver uses them. Why should this > one function use a different type than the rest? It's ugly and > inconsistent. Is this documented somewhere please? I see only a mention about this in chapter 5 of Documentation/CodingStyle , section (d) . Either way, separate such cosmetic change into another series so they're not in the way of relevant stuff. > And really, it's just as relevant as insisting that multiline patches > use some exact format, which checkpatch.pl doesn't complain about. The checkpatch is not almighty tool, Documentation/CodingStyle describes how code should be written/annotated/documented. Best regards, Marek Vasut