[U-Boot] [v2 1/6] spi: cadence_qspi: move trigger base configuration in init

[vikas <vikas.manocha@st.com>]

Hi,

On 08/13/2015 06:43 PM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> On Friday, August 14, 2015 at 03:24:10 AM, vikas wrote:
>> Hi Marek,
> 
> Hi,
> 
>> On 08/13/2015 10:35 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>> On Thursday, August 13, 2015 at 05:50:18 PM, vikasm wrote:
>>>> Hi Marek,
>>>
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>>> On 08/12/2015 07:07 PM, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>>>> On Thursday, July 16, 2015 at 04:27:29 AM, Vikas Manocha wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Commit message is missing.
>>>>
>>>> Actually subject of the mail was sufficient, this patch just moves the
>>>> register configuration in init.
>>>
>>> NAK, fix the commit message.
>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Vikas Manocha <vikas.manocha@st.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Changes in v2: Rebased to master
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  drivers/spi/cadence_qspi_apb.c |    9 ++-------
>>>>>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/spi/cadence_qspi_apb.c
>>>>>> b/drivers/spi/cadence_qspi_apb.c index d053407..1ae7edf 100644
>>>>>> --- a/drivers/spi/cadence_qspi_apb.c
>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/spi/cadence_qspi_apb.c
>>>>>> @@ -534,6 +534,8 @@ void cadence_qspi_apb_controller_init(struct
>>>>>> cadence_spi_platdata *plat)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  	/* Indirect mode configurations */
>>>>>>  	writel((plat->sram_size/2), plat->regbase +
>>>>>>  	CQSPI_REG_SRAMPARTITION);
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +	writel(((u32)plat->ahbbase & CQSPI_INDIRECTTRIGGER_ADDR_MASK),
>>>>>
>>>>> You can drop the parenthesis around the first argument, they're
>>>>> useless. Also, the indent of the second arg should be fixed, I believe
>>>>> checkpatch might even complain about it.
>>
>> ok for first comment about parenthesis but indent of second arg seems ok.
>> yes, checkpatch warning was "CHECK: Alignment should match open
>> parenthesis" but i ignored it. To respect 80 column, i had to move second
>> arg in another line. Am i missing something ?
> 
> Just don't ignore the checkpatch warnings next time please ;-)

This CHECK message is gonna come in any case if i move second argument in second line to restrict 80 column rule.
My understanding is to ignore this CHECK message.

Rgds,
Vikas

> 
> Best regards,
> Marek Vasut
> .
>