From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.15]) (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 8809D3C2781; Wed, 29 Apr 2026 09:55:10 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.15 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1777456513; cv=none; b=K00I5J8M31ms1Ky9Ino4gtyxLZ/H9ZTtD/RofZR211p64D8Oz3dqMvF7h3E3C2iTLfkf/3kX+6xYhQ6OeaxpIzhJ728z1YlkYQ2UGsYREx7jxdia8qh0MZXkIC8zK97NXJa38hayzeBcyamaMwukQYEIXeaDyEm+mQc1ZslG5aY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1777456513; c=relaxed/simple; bh=i4g81PTUWusksn1VQRzddmbepw6SAMy/nja9wr1wz90=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=aU/8yjUahdNryCg19DQWxhRiZCkN1LC634Q9TPv/+lzRN42cEDC4S5yGAoe9rMKkdoCPqCl0GSiZmxCsibEZoEp+OLi/leCmV7NVKJqa698Adk0/UbWmWLpM1cdjENXa9n3bURUlC4JXhEiqcGycE04lvJ3Tfh3uE4GAT12Kmjg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=mu6n6WG7; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.15 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="mu6n6WG7" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1777456511; x=1808992511; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=i4g81PTUWusksn1VQRzddmbepw6SAMy/nja9wr1wz90=; b=mu6n6WG7KyZMIa3YKijYvCnMcJrvBRrox7md4Qywo0mrqNXkijoFAois chhzOh1TtS/Ct0EIMGAk0S1IyE77Ha7tFtDiubvnDldXUdGuulr3+TNrD u1DNxwfjgG4eZObxAqvEWVrMlGh8cROh1Zr2squCB7S01yiN72znUQz9P quCUwQ9ZnPuREhD463EWEDOl4IbI+1kdHNzK1NYah0R5TfHPvdNYIhAtw Xdq8KV6krWumRzYimeJ/L2FNWjyMJyA/jp65F6XQPeUAbihTOglQO1eG+ NKyzp3Oi/SaIzxmeRgxl1B6QWhCgjHnKIuBGphdGNcDFiHP72ZyMw/eYw Q==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: 8F12m61FRA2UaBEkRlqwKA== X-CSE-MsgGUID: 9CrC1yvnR26zzk54V8k52w== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6800,10657,11770"; a="81988636" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.23,205,1770624000"; d="scan'208";a="81988636" Received: from fmviesa003.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.143]) by orvoesa107.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 29 Apr 2026 02:55:10 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: HRYMlwjTTN6DeGUPpzjDiA== X-CSE-MsgGUID: fazMivYyT5aEbTQxcewUSg== X-ExtLoop1: 1 Received: from ettammin-mobl2.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.245.245.141]) by fmviesa003-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 29 Apr 2026 02:55:08 -0700 Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2026 12:55:05 +0300 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Maxwell Doose Cc: rafael@kernel.org, lenb@kernel.org, andy@kernel.org, westeri@kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] ACPI: pmic: Replace mutex_lock/unlock() with guard()/scoped_guard() Message-ID: References: <20260429012432.120830-1-m32285159@gmail.com> 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: <20260429012432.120830-1-m32285159@gmail.com> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - c/o Alberga Business Park, 6 krs, Bertel Jungin Aukio 5, 02600 Espoo On Tue, Apr 28, 2026 at 08:24:32PM -0500, Maxwell Doose wrote: ... > v4: > - Added else keyword to if statement in > intel_soc_pmic_exec_mipi_pmic_seq_element() per Andy's request. Nope, sorry if I was not clear. The idea is to drop 'else'. Also make the patch less invasive. ... > - __func__, i2c_address, reg_address, value, mask); > + __func__, i2c_address, reg_address, value, mask); Still a stray change. ... It should be int ret; // also left untouched, drop that from commit message as well if (d->exec_mipi_pmic_seq_element) { // the below if-else-if just should be left untouched. if (i2c_address == d->pmic_i2c_address) { ... } else { ... } return ret; } if (d->pmic_i2c_address) { } ...warnings... return -EOPNOTSUPP; We may get a second patch for deeper refactoring later on. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko