From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from metis.ext.pengutronix.de ([85.220.165.71]:56861 "EHLO metis.ext.pengutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727859AbfJPIdE (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Oct 2019 04:33:04 -0400 Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 10:33:01 +0200 From: Uwe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?= Message-ID: <20191016083301.63okdbunkq2slevu@pengutronix.de> References: <20191016073842.1300297-1-thierry.reding@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In-Reply-To: <20191016073842.1300297-1-thierry.reding@gmail.com> Sender: linux-pwm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] pwm: stm32: Minor cleanups To: Thierry Reding Cc: Fabrice Gasnier , linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 09:38:39AM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote: > Hi, >=20 > Looking at Fabrice's STM32 patches I noticed that we're now passing the > breakinput values (u32) into a function via int parameters. The easiest > way to fix this inconsistency is by just passing a pointer to the break > input structure. There's some preparatory work here that makes the code > slightly more readable, in my opinion, but it's really marginal, so I'm > not terribly thrilled by this series in retrospect. >=20 > If nobody else thinks this is a big improvement I'll just scrap it. I like it. Together with my suggestion to add parameters to the register offsets I think it's worth the effort. Best regards Uwe --=20 Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-K=F6nig | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |