linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] power: supply: initial support for TWL6030/32

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <b4186150-bc96-49c7-8622-0692365acb69@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2024 14:53:19 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Andreas Kemnade <andreas@...nade.info>
Cc: tony@...mide.com, Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>,
 linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] power: supply: initial support for TWL6030/32

On 18/09/2024 14:43, Andreas Kemnade wrote:
> Am Wed, 18 Sep 2024 12:43:01 +0200
> schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>:
> 
> [...]
>> Drop {}, see checkpatch.
>>
>>> +		return dev_err_probe(&pdev->dev, ret,
>>> +				     "could not request irq %d\n",
>>> +				     charger->irq_chg);
>>> +	}
>>> +
> 
> Apparently checkpatch only moans about {} around single *lines*
> not single *statements*, even with --strict.
> 
> Coding-style says single statements,  so maybe checkpatch should be
> fixed?
> 
> Same for other appearance of this pattern.

Hm, could be. I think this still should be without {}, regardless of
checkpatch.

> 
>>> +	/* turing to charging to configure things */
>>> +	twl6030_charger_write(CONTROLLER_CTRL1, 0);
>>> +	twl6030_charger_interrupt(0, charger);
>>> +
>>> +	return 0;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static const struct of_device_id twl_charger_of_match[]
>>> __maybe_unused = {
>>> +	{.compatible = "ti,twl6030-charger", },
>>> +	{.compatible = "ti,twl6032-charger", },  
>>
>> So they are compatible? Why two entries in such case?
>>
> There is one device_is_compatible() in the file.

Ah, you should rather use match data. Compatibles inside the code do not
scale.



> 
> Regrads,
> Andreas

Best regards,
Krzysztof