[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <63a1bfa2acb84bc24b87a8dbd60b665c733d13cd.camel@pengutronix.de>
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2024 13:56:18 +0100
From: Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Thinh Nguyen <Thinh.Nguyen@...opsys.com>, Martin Blumenstingl
<martin.blumenstingl@...glemail.com>, Neil Armstrong
<neil.armstrong@...aro.org>, Felipe Balbi <balbi@...nel.org>,
linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb: dwc3-of-simple: Stop using
of_reset_control_array_get() directly
On Mi, 2024-01-24 at 04:39 -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 12:26:20PM +0100, Philipp Zabel wrote:
> > Use of_reset_control_array_get_optional_exclusive() instead, it is
> > implemented as:
> >
> > static inline struct reset_control *
> > of_reset_control_array_get_optional_exclusive(struct device_node *node)
> > {
> > return of_reset_control_array_get(node, false, true, true);
> > }
> >
> > This makes the code easier to understand and removes the last remaining
> > direct use of of_reset_control_array_get(). No functional changes.
> >
> > Fixes: f4cc91ddd856 ("usb: dwc3: of-simple: remove Amlogic GXL and AXG compatibles")
>
> No functional change, but a Fixes: tag? That doesn't make sense to me,
> sorry.
The referenced patch made the boolean parameters const but missed that
there is a static inline wrapper for this combination. I can drop the
Fixes: tag and describe this in the text.
regards
Philipp
Powered by blists - more mailing lists