From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.19]) (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 B49001EA7C; Thu, 7 Mar 2024 15:08:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.19 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1709824130; cv=none; b=XB4Xbj8I94FnfwepeLPDIoIxwe9L//pa3JAqH5N9zzpNGE4/L7Bp06mAArJ+Ez3CRihfSiNrZOItB9bOKqRBmNnOx9NibgFmBo1StFZVAa1CP6HNzNfJIfaYiouWqea81gMXOv2VsQPk4yfwWVU7CqFvYJQoD46CsajuemXqD70= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1709824130; c=relaxed/simple; bh=WqrZMC04N0Sq8XLYikG+IzncJ5ECq90e97m4y297rm8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Hgko7Yh13Pq/O3n5OSJd69haVzPI/CMrr231+94yQKarM1WmpoEhvXRWQfoqGisdg5S0EyICAh/gEmcFbqGZkNVwgsb9GmfFWcovTscc6sjytlmrUKljyCIY97wTuwcLKsF+twP4fzoLepDNEqoExyFwwWPEcecoRjo2hQZjE94= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=gj0eC7BC; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.19 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="gj0eC7BC" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1709824129; x=1741360129; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=WqrZMC04N0Sq8XLYikG+IzncJ5ECq90e97m4y297rm8=; b=gj0eC7BCkZtk38igC/DUOtZOUwI0L9iBJFU4r82LmY4yyS6XL2IIKTcM jtjOQzrpgxzVdMSpSExjBNRZova4skUsopYD3buTflUslfxvtS00e803H y3L7w9LFGR8WqbAVP+4DOc6ksF7gYha7yfVFsb2yqkKueXq3kBTlscDkM BfLznefMCb1z+ywn1RJgruK3x/QSeP+7Ugr274UOpH9G9+HaLRbztn6fw x+3RgyqgC1r4Isr9mSNNPQj52RRazz87ryTSZS0e+Tfz6ETkiafJnWkTV MFG0WyP98sgTCzLaOnAvYcuYQEOEV6pG3KYCi3/WFlIn6yM2Ifnn2L1qJ w==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,11006"; a="4352716" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.07,211,1708416000"; d="scan'208";a="4352716" Received: from fmsmga002.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.26]) by fmvoesa113.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 07 Mar 2024 07:08:47 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,11006"; a="914216576" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.07,211,1708416000"; d="scan'208";a="914216576" Received: from smile.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.54]) by fmsmga002.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 07 Mar 2024 07:08:46 -0800 Received: from andy by smile.fi.intel.com with local (Exim 4.97) (envelope-from ) id 1riFMR-0000000AatL-445z; Thu, 07 Mar 2024 17:08:43 +0200 Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2024 17:08:43 +0200 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Mark Brown Cc: linux-spi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] spi: Fix multiple issues with Chip Select variables and comments Message-ID: References: <20240306160114.3471398-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> <20240306160114.3471398-4-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> <32c04b04-17c1-40f6-ad57-6c18e47f4842@sirena.org.uk> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@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: Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo On Wed, Mar 06, 2024 at 10:12:06PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Wed, Mar 06, 2024 at 06:08:43PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 06, 2024 at 05:59:42PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > There are the following issues with the current code: > > > - inconsistent use of 0xFF and -1 for invalid chip select pin > > > - inconsistent plain or BIT() use > > > - wrong types used for last_cs_* fields > > > - wrong multi-line comment style > > > - misleading or hard-to-understand comments > > > > > > Fix all of these here. > > > > Please don't do this, as covered in submitting-patches.rst submit one > > change per patch. This makes it much easier to review things. > > Fine by me, consider this patch as RFC to understand if we want to have this > or not in general. I will rework it, if the idea is acceptable. I have sent a new series where I split this to three patches (and excluded the rest for now). -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko