Re: [PATCH V3 08/11] soc: mediatek: PMIC wrap: remove pwrap_is_mt8135() and pwrap_is_mt8173()

On 01/02/2016 12:11, Matthias Brugger wrote:

On 01/02/16 12:00, John Crispin wrote:

quoted

On 01/02/2016 11:55, Matthias Brugger wrote:

quoted

On 25/01/16 10:53, John Crispin wrote:

quoted

With ore SoCs being added the list of helper functions like these would

The commit message is something strange:
"With every new SoC being added..." maybe?

quoted

grow. While at it also add a new flag "bridge" and use that insted of

s/insted/instead

quoted

pwrap_is_mt8173() where appropriate.

you are lookign at V3 of the series, V4 has this fix done already

[...]

quoted

quoted

       }

@@ -830,6 +824,7 @@ static struct pmic_wrapper_type pwrap_mt8135 = {
       .int_en_all = BIT(31) | BIT(1),
       .spi_w = PWRAP_MAN_CMD_SPI_WRITE,
       .wdt_src = PWRAP_WDT_SRC_MASK_ALL,
+    .has_bridge = 1,
       .init_reg_clock = pwrap_mt8135_init_reg_clock,
       .init_special = pwrap_mt8135_init_special,
   };

Please set has_bridge explicitly for mt8173.

I dont get it. the original code never did that.

has_bridge was introduced by this patch, but you don't set it explicitly
to 0 in pwrap_mt8173.

Just as I see it, please try to write a summary to every new version of
a patch set which explains what you changed between one version and
another. This will help a lot making the review easier.

Thanks,
Matthias

You missed the "to zero" part before. now the comment makes sense. I can
set it to 0 if it is more obvious for you in that case.

general consent is to not declare statics to 0. check_patch.pl will
actually complain about those declarations. that is why i was confused.

	John