linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 6/8] scsi: ufs: make the UFS variant a platform device

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <46812b2d9fe024d935063d634e9e8971.squirrel@www.codeaurora.org>
Date:	Fri, 21 Aug 2015 22:19:58 -0000
From:	ygardi@...eaurora.org
To:	"Akinobu Mita" <akinobu.mita@...il.com>
Cc:	"Yaniv Gardi" <ygardi@...eaurora.org>,
	"Rob Herring" <robherring2@...il.com>,
	"Jej B" <james.bottomley@...senpartnership.com>,
	"Paul Bolle" <pebolle@...cali.nl>,
	"Christoph Hellwig" <hch@...radead.org>,
	"LKML" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, "Santosh Y" <santoshsy@...il.com>,
	linux-scsi-owner@...r.kernel.org,
	"Subhash Jadavani" <subhashj@...eaurora.org>,
	"Gilad Broner" <gbroner@...eaurora.org>,
	"Dolev Raviv" <draviv@...eaurora.org>,
	"Vinayak Holikatti" <vinholikatti@...il.com>,
	"James E.J. Bottomley" <jbottomley@...n.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 6/8] scsi: ufs: make the UFS variant a platform
 device

> 2015-08-20 22:59 GMT+09:00 Yaniv Gardi <ygardi@...eaurora.org>:
>> @@ -1036,7 +1037,7 @@ void ufs_qcom_clk_scale_notify(struct ufs_hba
>> *hba)
>>   * The variant operations configure the necessary controller and PHY
>>   * handshake during initialization.
>>   */
>> -static const struct ufs_hba_variant_ops ufs_hba_qcom_vops = {
>> +static struct ufs_hba_variant_ops ufs_hba_qcom_vops = {
>
> It's better to keep const.  In order to do this, we also need to put
> const to 'vops' member in struct ufs_hba and the second argument of
> ufshcd_pltfrm_init().

Why do you think it would be better to keep the vops as a const and have
the vops member in struct ufs_hba be const ?
I would say it is better to have the vops as is, and let each variany
decidehow it should behave.


>
>> +static void ufs_qcom_shutdown(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> +{
>> +       ufshcd_shutdown((struct ufs_hba *)platform_get_drvdata(pdev));
>> +}
>
> We don't need this function anymore since we have
> ufshcd_pltfrm_shutdown() now.

ok, as this variant shutdown is doing the same as pltform shutdown' it can
go away.

>
>> -static void ufshcd_pltfrm_shutdown(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> +void ufshcd_pltfrm_shutdown(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>  {
>> -       ufshcd_shutdown((struct ufs_hba *)platform_get_drvdata(pdev));
>> +       ufshcd_shutdown((struct ufs_hba *)platform_get_drvdata(pdev));
>
> Whitespace is used as code indent.  There are same issues in
> this patch series, so I recommend running checkpatch.pl before
> sending patches.

> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>


--
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/