[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 09:14:42 +0200
From: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...labora.com>
To: <Tudor.Ambarus@...rochip.com>
Cc: <vigneshr@...com>, <marek.vasut@...il.com>,
<linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>, <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
<jonas@...rbonn.se>, linux-aspeed@...ts.ozlabs.org,
andrew@...id.au, richard@....at, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
vz@...ia.com, linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, joel@....id.au,
miquel.raynal@...tlin.com, matthias.bgg@...il.com,
computersforpeace@...il.com, dwmw2@...radead.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 06/22] mtd: spi-nor: Rework read_fsr()
On Tue, 24 Sep 2019 07:46:12 +0000
<Tudor.Ambarus@...rochip.com> wrote:
> From: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...rochip.com>
>
> static int read_fsr(struct spi_nor *nor)
> becomes
> static int spi_nor_read_fsr(struct spi_nor *nor, u8 *fsr)
>
> The new function returns 0 on success and -errno otherwise.
> We let the callers pass the pointer to the buffer where the
> value of the Flag Status Register will be written. This way
> we avoid the casts between int and u8, which can be confusing.
>
> Prepend spi_nor_ to the function name, all functions should begin
> with that.
>
> S/pr_err/dev_err and drop duplicated dev_err in callers, in case the
> function returns error.
Same comments as for patch 5.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists