[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZhlXLNlsHEWrxEjF@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2024 18:45:48 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Raag Jadav <raag.jadav@...el.com>
Cc: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>,
jarkko.nikula@...ux.intel.com, mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com,
linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] pwm: dwc: allow suspend/resume for 16 channels
On Fri, Apr 12, 2024 at 06:38:24PM +0300, Raag Jadav wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 12, 2024 at 01:12:48PM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 12, 2024 at 11:38:12AM +0530, Raag Jadav wrote:
..
> > Otherwise I (only slightly) dislike
> > > + struct dwc_pwm_drvdata *data;
> > because "data" is very generic. I'd call it ddata. But I don't feel
> > strong here. I'm happy if you change to "ddata" in v2, I will silently
> > apply anyhow if you prefer "data".
>
> I think "data" is more readable, something like "ddata" would make me
> re-adjust my glasses ;)
ddata is _kinda_ idiomatic, there at least several drivers use this name
(as of my knowledge). I am bending towards Uwe's suggestion here.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists