linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] iio: dac: ad5770r: Add AD5770R support

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20200322221913.GA1922688@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date:   Mon, 23 Mar 2020 00:19:13 +0200
From:   "andriy.shevchenko@...el.com" <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>
To:     "Ardelean, Alexandru" <alexandru.Ardelean@...log.com>
Cc:     "Tachici, Alexandru" <Alexandru.Tachici@...log.com>,
        "jic23@...nel.org" <jic23@...nel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-iio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-iio@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Caprioru, Mircea" <Mircea.Caprioru@...log.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] iio: dac: ad5770r: Add AD5770R support

On Sun, Mar 22, 2020 at 09:17:06AM +0000, Ardelean, Alexandru wrote:
> On Sat, 2020-03-21 at 23:09 +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 02:10:30PM +0200, Alexandru Tachici wrote:
> > > The AD5770R is a 6-channel, 14-bit resolution, low noise, programmable
> > > current output digital-to-analog converter (DAC) for photonics control
> > > applications.
> > > 
> > > It contains five 14-bit resolution current sourcing DAC channels and one
> > > 14-bit resolution current sourcing/sinking DAC channel.
> > 
> 
> This patch made it into linux-next.
> Doing a v2 now may be a bit noisy.
> 
> Maybe we can tidy-this-up later.
> To be honest, it won't be the highest on our list.
> [ I know how that sounds ]

Yes, you may consider a follow up.

> We can probably leave it for other people to clean it up.
> [ People that want to start contributing to the kernel ]

Maybe, but isn't better to supply cleaner code in the first place?

I mean that these comments may be taken into consideration for the future
contributions.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko