[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170607200617.GD1019@valkosipuli.retiisi.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2017 23:06:17 +0300
From: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@....fi>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Cc: Rajmohan Mani <rajmohan.mani@...el.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] ACPI / PMIC: Add TI PMIC TPS68470 operation
region driver
On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 04:37:12PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >> +static acpi_status ti_pmic_common_handler(u32 function,
> > + acpi_physical_address address,
> > + u32 bits, u64 *value,
> > + void *handler_context,
>
> > handler_context is unused.
>
> >> + int, int, u64 *),
> >> + int (*update)(struct regmap *,
> >> + int, int, u64),
> >> + struct ti_pmic_table *table,
> >> + int table_size)
>
> I would even split this to have separate update() and get() paths
> instead of having such a monster of parameters.
I'm not really worried about the two callbacks --- you have the compexity,
which is agruably rather manageable, split into a number of caller
functions. I'd rather keep it as-is.
--
Sakari Ailus
e-mail: sakari.ailus@....fi XMPP: sailus@...iisi.org.uk
Powered by blists - more mailing lists