From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Richard Retanubun Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2013 09:24:37 -0400 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] spi: Use DIV_ROUND_UP at appropriate places In-Reply-To: References: <1371196742.20321.1.camel@phoenix> Message-ID: <51BB1995.4000503@ruggedcom.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On 14/06/13 09:09 AM, Axel Lin wrote: > 2013/6/14 Jagan Teki: >> Hi, >> >> IMHO: >> Can you please use the proper commit header prefix. >> >> I am just sharing my thoughts, ignore this if you know it already. >> I followed below syntax. >> ":::" >> >> Ex: for this commit (seems like this commit changes two drivers) >> spi: cf_qspi | mxc_spi: Use DIV_ROUND_UP at appropriate places > > This does not scale. > What if a (trivial) patch touches 10 drivers? Depends how trivial it is I guess. I can see benefits to both approaches. This one is simple enough that I am okay if it is grouped. Just for my own education, how do I correctly ACK just the part I know (mcf_qspi in this case) in a grouped patch? Is there a way to automate my "Signed-off-by:" via e-mail? -- Richard Retanubun > >> >> if you send same changes individually. >> spi: cf_qspi: Use DIV_ROUND_UP at appropriate places >> spi: mxc_spi: Use DIV_ROUND_UP at appropriate places > > I was thinking doing so may add maintainer's burden. (well for this > case with 2 patches, it's not a problem) > But since you prefer sending a fix per driver, I'll resend the patches. > >> >> On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 1:29 PM, Axel Lin wrote: >>> This change slightly improves readability. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Axel Lin >>> --- >>> drivers/spi/cf_qspi.c | 2 +- >>> drivers/spi/mxc_spi.c | 6 +++--- >>> 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/spi/cf_qspi.c b/drivers/spi/cf_qspi.c >>> index a37ac4e..06bcf91 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/spi/cf_qspi.c >>> +++ b/drivers/spi/cf_qspi.c >>> @@ -171,7 +171,7 @@ int spi_xfer(struct spi_slave *slave, unsigned int bitlen, const void *dout, >>> volatile qspi_t *qspi = dev->regs; >>> u8 *txbuf = (u8 *)dout; >>> u8 *rxbuf = (u8 *)din; >>> - u32 count = ((bitlen / 8) + (bitlen % 8 ? 1 : 0)); >> >> Was this equivalent to (bitlen + 7) / 8 ? > > Yes. And that is the point of this patch ( to handle divide-round-up > in a uniform way). >> >> -- >> Thanks, >> Jagan.