[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <47d8b629-708f-de82-1118-054200331ef9@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2020 00:17:06 +0300
From: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>
To: Michał Mirosław <mirq-linux@...e.qmqm.pl>
Cc: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 09/12] i2c: tegra: Clean up probe function
03.09.2020 00:06, Michał Mirosław пишет:
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2020 at 11:23:00PM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>> The driver's probe function code is difficult to read and follow. This
>> patch splits probe function into several logical parts that are easy to
>> work with.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-tegra.c | 398 ++++++++++++++++++++-------------
>> 1 file changed, 240 insertions(+), 158 deletions(-)
> [...]
>
> I can see why you want to extract clock setup and combine DT-parsing parts,
> but the rest is not that clear. At least the clock setup split should be
> a separate patch, as it seems to require massive code motion.
> For eg. runtime PM setup/disable or interrupt setup, I would actually suggest
> to drop the parts as they make the code harder to follow (you have
> a function doing nothing but calling another one).
Okay, I guess indeed it will be better to squash couple functions back,
but excluding functions that help to make error unwinding cleaner. Thank
you for the suggestion!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists