Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] mtd: nand: Cleanup/rework the atmel_nand driver
From: Andy Shevchenko <hidden>
Date: 2017-02-20 23:54:40
Also in:
linux-arm-kernel, lkml
On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 1:40 AM, Andy Shevchenko [off-list ref] wrote:
On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 10:50 PM, Boris Brezillon [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On Mon, 20 Feb 2017 21:38:03 +0100 Boris Brezillon [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On Mon, 20 Feb 2017 22:27:17 +0200 Andy Shevchenko [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Boris Brezillon [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
drivers/mtd/nand/atmel/nand-controller.c | 2269 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ drivers/mtd/nand/atmel_nand.c | 2479 ------------------------------Does -M -C help you? At least it would help reviewersNo it doesn't, because files were not just moved around using git mv, it's a complete rewrite of the driver. IIUC, you're about to review this submission, or are you just trolling like last time?My bad, I mistaken you with someone else. Sorry for being harsh, but my explanation stands ;-).No problem. I was asking since it so big and on first glance looks like a partial copy (I dunno if parameter to -C makes it somehow useful), though I can't review this. It's too big to me. Sorry I'm really not trolling, just didn't read commit message carefully.
Okay, I very quickly looked into the code, what I noticed - you like extra parens and empty lines in some cases (not big deal) - some functions perhaps might have been refactored to have common pieces in error handling, though I didn't read core carefully. Most important part I have noticed is a GPIO request. I didn't get why you almost repeat gpiod_get() in case of platform data? Shouldn't we have GPIO look up table? Can we use builtin device properties (for GPIO and/or overall)? -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html