[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ca1ede5f-0859-5eea-f59c-9377d5945b71@linux.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2023 10:19:06 +0200
From: Amadeusz Sławiński
<amadeuszx.slawinski@...ux.intel.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>,
alsa-devel@...a-project.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Cezary Rojewski <cezary.rojewski@...el.com>,
Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>,
Kai Vehmanen <kai.vehmanen@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 7/8] ASoC: Intel: Skylake: Update PCI ID list
On 6/28/2023 4:52 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 10:51:34PM +0200, Amadeusz Sławiński wrote:
>> Use PCI device IDs from pci_ids.h header and while at it change to using
>> PCI_DEVICE_DATA macro, to simplify declarations.
>
> PCI_DEVICE_DATA()
>
> ...
>
>> + { PCI_DEVICE_DATA(INTEL, HDA_SKL_LP, &snd_soc_acpi_intel_skl_machines) },
>
> Do you really need TAB(s) in the parameter list?
>
I did this to align entries, I know it is not that visible in this
patch, but they are defined close to each other and I feel that it looks
better if they are aligned, but can drop alignment if you prefer. Should
I also drop them in other patches, as I don't see comment for that?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists