[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <576276E5.5040500@nvidia.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 15:22:37 +0530
From: Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>,
<javier@....samsung.com>, <mturquette@...libre.com>,
<robh+dt@...nel.org>, <linux@...linux.org.uk>
CC: <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>,
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
<linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@...hile0.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] clk: max77686: Add support for MAX77620 clocks
Hi Krzysztof/Javier,
Thanks for review of the series.
I will post the V2 after taking care of all comment.
One query about the comment.
Thanks,
Laxman
On Thursday 16 June 2016 03:24 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 06/15/2016 04:13 PM, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
>> enum chip_name {
>> CHIP_MAX77686,
>> CHIP_MAX77802,
>> + CHIP_MAX77620,
> Now it is more obvious why it is here. However I don't like the
> duplication of device IDs, under different names and different values:
> 1. include/linux/mfd/max77686-private.h
> 2. include/linux/mfd/max77620.h
> 3. here
>
> I was thinking about way of combining it... but these headers are
> different. Unless there will be one header for all three devices.
>
> Anyway, please add the max77686 prefix to the enum.
so will it be:
enum max77686_chip_name {
CHIP_MAX77686,
CHIP_MAX77802,
CHIP_MAX77620,
};
Will it be fine here?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists