From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 183DD1CD12; Wed, 14 Feb 2024 12:47:11 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.12 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1707914833; cv=none; b=XvsaHeq0Wdc8Dw7zyiOy6UtNWn1685RfXdWEKg0ZhhWwwHo+x2kLqOrghCBX3mq4J2EKvgQpttVE9JwgueASbTV748S8qmUA11z2QXNxzEv9OiDG+PiBreXf0sxaHVBDwbJuEy3PHeYulaX9ppBvC96Z3kStFE1CklzhSu6VDpg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1707914833; c=relaxed/simple; bh=tHbO3A6mx4RTUftXJJG+TOoZZn+bAlVD03qTchhovEU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=jm5lzBR/+PXJYHTtHOohi/htrzYNw/dyEcDUOILqFaTpnuLrGIctP+m2LOYlD2TDnyManohTey7Bw+KFB3PtCIKyxIrCYKsM+8d1X2fnNmtkXdPHlK0p96+YHUWq4nkFpw3ztH5veoT7Cb2LeoWVicnGO9MVEu+sukQ8r87JO1s= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.12 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=kernel.org X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10982"; a="13351599" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.06,159,1705392000"; d="scan'208";a="13351599" Received: from fmsmga002.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.26]) by orvoesa104.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 14 Feb 2024 04:46:23 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10982"; a="912083820" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.06,159,1705392000"; d="scan'208";a="912083820" Received: from smile.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.54]) by fmsmga002.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 14 Feb 2024 04:46:20 -0800 Received: from andy by smile.fi.intel.com with local (Exim 4.97) (envelope-from ) id 1raEeX-00000004UVC-42BS; Wed, 14 Feb 2024 14:46:17 +0200 Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2024 14:46:17 +0200 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Uwe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?= Cc: Mika Westerberg , Linus Walleij , Hans de Goede , Ilpo =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=E4rvinen?= , linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, kernel@pengutronix.de, platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 067/164] pwm: lpss-*: Make use of devm_pwmchip_alloc() function Message-ID: References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 10:31:54AM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > This prepares the pwm-lpc drivers to further changes of the pwm core lpc --> lpss pwm --> PWM > outlined in the commit introducing devm_pwmchip_alloc(). There is no > intended semantical change and the driver should behave as before. ... > -struct pwm_lpss_chip *devm_pwm_lpss_probe(struct device *dev, void __iomem *base, > +struct pwm_chip *devm_pwm_lpss_probe(struct device *dev, void __iomem *base, > const struct pwm_lpss_boardinfo *info) Missing indentation amendment for the second line. ... > + struct pwm_chip *chip; > struct pwm_lpss_chip *lpwm; > unsigned long c; > int i, ret; Please, keep reversed xmas tree order in place. struct pwm_lpss_chip *lpwm; struct pwm_chip *chip; unsigned long c; int i, ret; ... With the above being addressed, Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko