[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <EF2E73589CA71846A15D0B2CDF79505D087B38B899@wm021.weinmann.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2011 16:35:21 +0100
From: "Voss, Nikolaus" <N.Voss@...nmann.de>
To: "'balbi@...com'" <balbi@...com>
CC: "'linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org'" <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
"'linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org'"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"'linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org'" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"'ben-linux@...ff.org'" <ben-linux@...ff.org>,
"'khali@...ux-fr.org'" <khali@...ux-fr.org>,
"'nicolas.ferre@...el.com'" <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>,
"'rmallon@...il.com'" <rmallon@...il.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH V3 2/4] drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c: add new driver
Hi,
> > +#include <mach/at91_twi.h>
> > +#include <mach/board.h>
> > +#include <mach/cpu.h>
>
> avoid including <mach/*> on drivers.
Should I move at91_twi.h to include/linux (omap does it like this,
other use the mach-include)?
> > + if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_TXCOMP) {
> > + at91_disable_twi_interrupts(dev);
> > + dev->transfer_status = status;
> > + complete(&dev->cmd_complete);
> > + }
> > + else if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_RXRDY) {
> > + at91_twi_read_next_byte(dev);
> > + }
> > + else if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_TXRDY) {
> > + at91_twi_write_next_byte(dev);
> > + }
> > + else {
> > + return IRQ_NONE;
>
> coding style is wrong. Also, are those IRQ events really mutually exclusive ??
These are indeed mutually exclusive (semantically).
Niko
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists