[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ba7453a51bebb2ff4dbb7a3406f1dda511f5f8fa.camel@fi.rohmeurope.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2019 05:29:35 +0000
From: "Vaittinen, Matti" <Matti.Vaittinen@...rohmeurope.com>
To: "alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com" <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>
CC: "dmurphy@...com" <dmurphy@...com>,
"linux-leds@...r.kernel.org" <linux-leds@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"mazziesaccount@...il.com" <mazziesaccount@...il.com>,
"mturquette@...libre.com" <mturquette@...libre.com>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"jacek.anaszewski@...il.com" <jacek.anaszewski@...il.com>,
"a.zummo@...ertech.it" <a.zummo@...ertech.it>,
"linus.walleij@...aro.org" <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
"lgirdwood@...il.com" <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
"mark.rutland@....com" <mark.rutland@....com>,
"robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
"bgolaszewski@...libre.com" <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>,
"linux-clk@...r.kernel.org" <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>,
"pavel@....cz" <pavel@....cz>,
"sboyd@...nel.org" <sboyd@...nel.org>,
"broonie@...nel.org" <broonie@...nel.org>,
"lee.jones@...aro.org" <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 09/13] mfd: rtc: support RTC on ROHM BD71828 with
BD70528 driver
Hello Alexandre,
On Thu, 2019-10-17 at 12:48 +0200, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> On 17/10/2019 10:36:44+0000, Vaittinen, Matti wrote:
> > Hello Alexandre,
> >
> > Thanks for quick check! I'll be off for the rest of the week but I
> > will
> > re-work this patch at next week :) I agree with you regarding most
> > of
> > the comments.
> >
> > > > +
> > > > +
> > > > +/*
> > > > + * RTC definitions shared between
> > > > + *
> > > > + * BD70528
> > > > + * and BD71828
> > > > + */
> > > > +
> > > > +#define ROHM_BD1_MASK_RTC_SEC 0x7f
> > > > +#define ROHM_BD1_MASK_RTC_MINUTE 0x7f
> > > > +#define ROHM_BD1_MASK_RTC_HOUR_24H 0x80
> > > > +#define ROHM_BD1_MASK_RTC_HOUR_PM 0x20
> > > > +#define ROHM_BD1_MASK_RTC_HOUR 0x3f
> > > > +#define ROHM_BD1_MASK_RTC_DAY 0x3f
> > > > +#define ROHM_BD1_MASK_RTC_WEEK 0x07
> > > > +#define ROHM_BD1_MASK_RTC_MONTH 0x1f
> > > > +#define ROHM_BD1_MASK_RTC_YEAR 0xff
> > > > +#define ROHM_BD1_MASK_ALM_EN 0x7
> > > > +
> > >
> > > All that renaming is distracting and useless. Please resubmit
> > > without
> > > renaming defines, structs and functions to make it easier to
> > > review.
> >
> > I would prefer renaming because it makes it clearly visible which
> > defines/structs/functions are common for both PMICs and which are
> > PMIC
> > specific. But I really understand the problem of spotting real
> > changes.
> > Would it be Ok if I did renaming in separate patch which does not
> > bring
> > in any other changes - and then the functional changes in separate
> > patch?
> >
>
> No, unless you can guarantee that all future PMICs from rohm matching
> the wildcard will use this driver.
Allright. I'll avoid renaming in next version.
Br,
Matti Vaittinen
Powered by blists - more mailing lists