[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZNEA3w2DEbK+e+my@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2023 17:34:07 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@...nel.org>
Cc: Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa@...nel.org>, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
Jan Dabros <jsd@...ihalf.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 5/9] i2c: designware: Always provide ID tables
On Fri, Aug 04, 2023 at 11:00:55PM +0200, Andi Shyti wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 11:05:05PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 28, 2023 at 03:33:59PM +0300, Jarkko Nikula wrote:
> > > On 7/25/23 17:30, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
...
> > > > +/* Work with hotplug and coldplug */
> > > > +MODULE_ALIAS("platform:i2c_designware");
> > >
> > > Perhaps this comment can be retired, i.e. dropped.
> >
> > Then it needs to be done in a separate patch, because in the other file the
> > comment will be left untouched.
>
> You are being a bit too religios here...
No, it's being consistent. Either we remove them both or don't touch.
> if you want to stick to
> this, then you need to send a patch for sorting by ID, a patch
> for grouping together MODULE_*, a patch to remove this comment
> and a patch to always provide the id table.
>
> I think, "while at it", you can safely remove the redundant
> comment :)
>
> It doesn't make too much difference to me anyway:
>
> Reviewed-by: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@...nel.org>
Thank you!
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists