From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.11]) (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 D84E310A3E; Wed, 11 Jun 2025 15:15:24 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.11 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1749654926; cv=none; b=aG0WkVrc4bhToah/IRMegBjE4Ir9xPEHS4OeBPpwmvj0OtLP/TLtXvnruYU+jVGCJE0P6f1qo3xHETVQ2nfX2eEtjk2xm8cHRE3KrBL5eaY330na7KTzQUdFZuGWFpbZWjx+66wyncYeybDPiF3An5QyN33j0JADvuweZ4De2oc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1749654926; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Xra69tmZS3fpjJeBgHc+1iBGy9hoV7GWfvRxN9zoVv0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=ImXv1IUVRbo4VElkRTKu32g4Ph1MaqPfw0qYiu9SI3DQ4W9k5apFlNicwtsM1D5WHtdEOVIwN3kF0GHx76yZBph32dXKs+t9A2Z7raalINqzE2pFTzU7JTZkV00aV3JNhpr710P24pwm8sSEHTeYtDTqVLHiSu1P0Pyq+NOnP7s= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=kernel.org; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.11 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=kernel.org X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: G542xsPTTw2gO9RUH7Pr9w== X-CSE-MsgGUID: CfArInyYQo6B/diLnnB29Q== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6800,10657,11461"; a="62083977" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.16,228,1744095600"; d="scan'208";a="62083977" Received: from orviesa001.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.141]) by orvoesa103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 11 Jun 2025 08:15:25 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: RqDJS5oZTUGG50MctG74ug== X-CSE-MsgGUID: aX1+3EfSR7K7nKqxctsySA== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.16,228,1744095600"; d="scan'208";a="184428915" Received: from smile.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.52]) by orviesa001.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 11 Jun 2025 08:15:20 -0700 Received: from andy by smile.fi.intel.com with local (Exim 4.98.2) (envelope-from ) id 1uPNAb-00000005gIz-18f5; Wed, 11 Jun 2025 18:15:17 +0300 Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2025 18:15:17 +0300 From: Andy Shevchenko To: David Lechner Cc: Michael Hennerich , Jonathan Cameron , Nuno =?iso-8859-1?Q?S=E1?= , Da Xue , linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] iio: adc: ad7949: use spi_is_bpw_supported() Message-ID: References: <20250611-iio-adc-ad7949-use-spi_is_bpw_supported-v1-1-c4e15bfd326e@baylibre.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-iio@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20250611-iio-adc-ad7949-use-spi_is_bpw_supported-v1-1-c4e15bfd326e@baylibre.com> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 10:04:58AM -0500, David Lechner wrote: > Use spi_is_bpw_supported() instead of directly accessing spi->controller > ->bits_per_word_mask. bits_per_word_mask may be 0, which implies that > 8-bits-per-word is supported. spi_is_bpw_supported() takes this into > account while spi_ctrl_mask == SPI_BPW_MASK(8) does not. > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-spi/c8b8a963-6cef-4c9b-bfef-dab2b7bd0b0f@sirena.org.uk/ Reported-by yourself. I'm wondering if the Closes adds a value in this case. Otherwise I can do the same to maybe 10% of my patches, for instance. But I don't think I put Closes tag on whatever improvement potential bug fix I do report (read: notice) myself. > Signed-off-by: David Lechner Code wise LGTM, Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko