From: Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>
To: Luca Ceresoli <luca@lucaceresoli.net>
Cc: "Wolfram Sang" <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>,
linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org,
linux-i3c@lists.infradead.org,
"Kieran Bingham" <kieran@ksquared.org.uk>,
"Niklas Söderlund" <niklas.soderlund@ragnatech.se>,
"Jacopo Mondi" <jacopo@jmondi.org>,
"Laurent Pinchart" <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>,
"Vladimir Zapolskiy" <vz@mleia.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 5/6] i2c: of: mark a whole array of regs as reserved
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2020 10:10:35 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200415081035.GB1141@ninjato> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c4e41b0a-4b9a-0db9-94dc-bbbc2f013133@lucaceresoli.net>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1211 bytes --]
> > -int of_i2c_get_board_info(struct device_node *node, struct i2c_board_info *info)
> > +static void of_i2c_decode_board_info(struct device_node *node, u32 addr,
> > + bool first_addr, struct i2c_board_info *info)
>
> While I confirm the patch looks generally OK, let me add the name of
> this function is not quite self-explaining. The difference between "get"
> and "decode" has nothing to do with the different actions these
> functions do, i.e. the new function gets (or: decodes) info about a
> single address that is passed, the old "get" function gets the info for
> the first address.
>
> I'd suggest the new function be named of_i2c_get_board_info_one_addr or
> similar. Not super nice, a bit long, but self-explanatory.
I view them a bit differently, I think. of_i2c_decode_board_info() is a
helper function to retrieve "some" addr. It is used by
of_i2c_get_board_info() which has the special case of getting the first
address. of_i2c_register_device() is the other user with the case of
getting each address specified. So, I wouldn't put this helper function
on the same level as the users of this helper.
Yet, no strong opinion here, I will think about it...
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-04-15 8:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-03-18 15:00 [RFC PATCH v2 0/6] i2c: of: reserve unknown and ancillary addresses Wolfram Sang
2020-03-18 15:00 ` [RFC PATCH v2 1/6] i2c: use DEFINE for the dummy driver name Wolfram Sang
2020-04-15 8:09 ` Kieran Bingham
2020-03-18 15:00 ` [RFC PATCH v2 2/6] i2c: allow DT nodes without 'compatible' Wolfram Sang
2020-04-10 13:49 ` Luca Ceresoli
2020-04-15 7:59 ` Wolfram Sang
2020-04-15 8:07 ` Kieran Bingham
2020-04-15 8:16 ` Wolfram Sang
2020-04-15 8:38 ` Kieran Bingham
2020-04-16 14:53 ` Luca Ceresoli
2020-04-15 8:48 ` Kieran Bingham
2020-04-15 9:46 ` Wolfram Sang
2020-03-18 15:00 ` [RFC PATCH v2 3/6] i2c: of: remove superfluous parameter from exported function Wolfram Sang
2020-03-19 12:41 ` Boris Brezillon
2020-04-15 8:13 ` Kieran Bingham
2020-03-18 15:00 ` [RFC PATCH v2 4/6] i2c: of: error message unification Wolfram Sang
2020-04-10 17:02 ` Luca Ceresoli
2020-04-15 8:17 ` Kieran Bingham
2020-04-15 8:50 ` Kieran Bingham
2020-03-18 15:00 ` [RFC PATCH v2 5/6] i2c: of: mark a whole array of regs as reserved Wolfram Sang
2020-04-10 17:05 ` Luca Ceresoli
2020-04-13 9:55 ` Luca Ceresoli
2020-04-15 8:10 ` Wolfram Sang [this message]
2020-04-15 10:07 ` Luca Ceresoli
2020-03-18 15:00 ` [RFC PATCH v2 6/6] i2c: core: hand over reserved devices when requesting ancillary addresses Wolfram Sang
2020-04-15 10:07 ` Luca Ceresoli
2020-03-28 3:50 ` [RFC PATCH v2 0/6] i2c: of: reserve unknown and " Wolfram Sang
2020-04-15 8:27 ` Wolfram Sang
2020-04-15 8:35 ` Kieran Bingham
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=20200415081035.GB1141@ninjato \
--to=wsa@the-dreams.de \
--cc=jacopo@jmondi.org \
--cc=kieran@ksquared.org.uk \
--cc=laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com \
--cc=linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-i3c@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luca@lucaceresoli.net \
--cc=niklas.soderlund@ragnatech.se \
--cc=vz@mleia.com \
--cc=wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).