Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] mmc: sdhci-of-arasan: Enable UHS-1 support for Keem Bay SOC

From: Michal Simek <michal.simek@xilinx.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>,
	Michal Simek <michal.simek@xilinx.com>
Cc: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	lakshmi.bai.raja.subramanian@intel.com,
	linux-mmc <linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org>,
	Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Wan Ahmad Zainie <wan.ahmad.zainie.wan.mohamad@intel.com>,
	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
	muhammad.husaini.zulkifli@intel.com,
	linux-arm Mailing List <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] mmc: sdhci-of-arasan: Enable UHS-1 support for Keem Bay SOC
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2020 11:10:42 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <f81384ff-1f7b-28ea-1ec1-2568e9f669ee@xilinx.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHp75VfXe=dwbNEdUfwmMnZCkSTRH_6HjGD0MUs=GY0en4f0sw@mail.gmail.com>

On 07. 10. 20 10:55, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 7, 2020 at 11:38 AM Michal Simek <michal.simek@xilinx.com> wrote:
>> On 06. 10. 20 17:55, muhammad.husaini.zulkifli@intel.com wrote:
> 
> ...
> 
>>> +             /*
>>> +              * This is like final gatekeeper. Need to ensure changed voltage
> 
> like a final
> 
>>> +              * is settled before and after turn on this bit.
>>> +              */
> 
> ...
> 
>>> +             /*
>>> +              * This is like final gatekeeper. Need to ensure changed voltage
> 
> Likewise.
> 
>>> +              * is settled before and after turn on this bit.
>>> +              */
> 
> ...
> 
>>> +     struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
>>
>> nit: I got this but as I see 3 lines below maybe would be better to use
>> it everywhere but it can be done in separate patch.
> 
> In that case I think it would be better to have that patch first. It
> make follow up code cleaner.
> 
> ...
> 
>>> +     if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "intel,keembay-sdhci-5.1-sd")) {
>>> +             struct gpio_desc *uhs;
>>> +
>>> +             uhs = devm_gpiod_get_optional(dev, "uhs", GPIOD_OUT_HIGH);
>>
>> I can't see change in dt binding to record uhs gpio.
>>
>>
>> Better
>> sdhci_arasan->uhs_gpio = devm_gpiod_get_optional(dev, "uhs",
>> GPIOD_OUT_HIGH);
>>
>> then you can avoid uhs variable.
> 
> Actually it's readability vs. additional variable. It was my
> suggestion to have a variable to make readability better.
> Are you insisting on this change?

I understand that it is just about preference. I would use it directly
not to deal with it. If your preference is via variable I am fine with
it too.

Thanks,
Michal

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel