[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20241028203839.65debe2b@jic23-huawei>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2024 20:38:39 +0000
From: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
To: Aren Moynihan <aren@...cevolution.org>
Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>, Lars-Peter Clausen
<lars@...afoo.de>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Chen-Yu Tsai
<wens@...e.org>, Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@...il.com>, Samuel Holland
<samuel@...lland.org>, Kaustabh Chakraborty <kauschluss@...root.org>,
Barnabás Czémán <trabarni@...il.com>, Ondrej Jirman
<megi@....cz>, Uwe Kleine-König
<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-sunxi@...ts.linux.dev, Dragan
Simic <dsimic@...jaro.org>, phone-devel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/6] iio: light: stk3310: Implement vdd and leda
supplies
On Mon, 28 Oct 2024 12:37:14 -0400
Aren Moynihan <aren@...cevolution.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2024 at 04:38:37PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 28, 2024 at 10:19:57AM -0400, Aren Moynihan wrote:
> > > The vdd and leda supplies must be powered on for the chip to function
> > > and can be powered off during system suspend.
> > >
> > > Co-developed-by: Ondrej Jirman <megi@....cz>
> >
> > Missing SoB. Please, read Submitting Patches documentation for understanding
> > what has to be done here.
> >
> > > Signed-off-by: Aren Moynihan <aren@...cevolution.org>
> >
> > ...
> >
> > > Notes:
> > > I'm not sure what the proper way to handle attribution for this patch
> > > is. It was origionally based on a patch by Ondrej Jirman[1], but I have
> > > rewritten a large portion if it. I have included a Co-developed-by tag
> > > to indicate this, but haven't sent him this patch, so I'm not sure what
> > > to do about a Signed-off-by.
> >
> > Ah, seems you already aware of this issue. So, either drop Co-developed-by
> > (and if you wish you may give a credit in a free form inside commit message)
> > or make sure you get his SoB tag.
>
> Alright, thanks for clarifying that.
>
> > > mutex_init(&data->lock);
> >
> > Somewhere (in the previous patch?) you want to switch to devm_mutex_init().
>
> Good catch, it looks like that was being leaked before this refactor.
> Yeah that sounds like the right place, I'll include it in v4.
Not really on the leaking. Take a look at the cleanup for devm_mutex_init().
It's debug only and not all that useful in most cases.
However, it is good to not assume that now we have a devm_mutex_init()
available that is easy to use.
>
> > > + ret = devm_regulator_bulk_get(&client->dev, ARRAY_SIZE(data->supplies),
> > > + data->supplies);
> > > + if (ret)
> > > + return dev_err_probe(&client->dev, ret, "get regulators failed\n");
> >
> > > + return dev_err_probe(&client->dev, ret,
> > > + "regulator enable failed\n");
> >
> > > + ret = devm_add_action_or_reset(&client->dev, stk3310_regulators_disable, data);
> > > + if (ret)
> > > + return dev_err_probe(&client->dev, ret,
> > > + "failed to register regulator cleanup\n");
> >
> > With
> >
> > struct devuce *dev = &client->dev;
> >
> > at the top of the function makes these and more lines neater.
> >
> [snip]
> >
> > While changing to RCT order here, it seems you have inconsistent approach
> > elsewhere (in your own patches!). Please, be consistent with chosen style.
>
> Sounds easy enough to fix, I'll include these in v4.
>
> Thanks taking the time to review
> - Aren
Powered by blists - more mailing lists