Re: [PATCH v4 5/5] i2c: designware: Cleaning comments and formatation
From: Jarkko Nikula <hidden>
Date: 2016-12-13 15:08:16
Also in:
linux-i2c, lkml
On 12/07/2016 07:55 PM, Luis Oliveira wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
- Missspelling, comment formatation and fix a string of the existing code Signed-off-by: Luis Oliveira <redacted> --- Changes V3->V4: (Andy Shevchenko) - created a commit message drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-common.c | 2 +- drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-slave.c | 10 ++++++---- 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-common.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-common.c index 41b38d8b8732..838ef662d2c8 100644 --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-common.c +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-common.c@@ -42,7 +42,7 @@ static char *abort_sources[] = { [ABRT_TXDATA_NOACK] = "data not acknowledged", [ABRT_GCALL_NOACK] = - "no acknowledgement for a general call", + "no acknowledgment for a general call",
I'm not a native speaker but are both acknowledgement and acknowledgment ok? I.e. is there need to change?
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-slave.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-slave.c index 1c7f82bb2513..442bc5ce6d47 100644 --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-slave.c +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-slave.c@@ -70,8 +70,8 @@ int i2c_dw_init_slave(struct dw_i2c_dev *dev) /* Configure register access mode 16bit */ dev->accessor_flags |= ACCESS_16BIT; } else if (reg != DW_IC_COMP_TYPE_VALUE) { - dev_err(dev->dev, "Unknown Synopsys component type: " - "0x%08x\n", reg); + dev_err(dev->dev, + "Unknown Synopsys component type: 0x%08x\n", reg); i2c_dw_release_lock(dev); return -ENODEV; }@@ -181,8 +181,10 @@ int i2c_dw_reg_slave(struct i2c_client *slave) return -EBUSY; if (slave->flags & I2C_CLIENT_TEN) return -EAFNOSUPPORT; - /* set slave address in the IC_SAR register, - * the address to which the DW_apb_i2c responds */ + /* + * set slave address in the IC_SAR register, + * the address to which the DW_apb_i2c responds + */
These two should be done already in the patch 4/5 since it introduced the lines that you are changing here. -- Jarkko