[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51ec6f40-c62a-418b-a538-082e3ad887cb@acm.org>
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2025 11:20:06 -0800
From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
To: Peter Griffin <peter.griffin@...aro.org>, alim.akhtar@...sung.com,
James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com, martin.petersen@...cle.com,
krzk@...nel.org
Cc: linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
willmcvicker@...gle.com, tudor.ambarus@...aro.org, andre.draszik@...aro.org,
ebiggers@...nel.org, kernel-team@...roid.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] scsi: ufs: exynos: Move phy calls to .exit() callback
On 2/26/25 2:04 PM, Peter Griffin wrote:
> +static void exynos_ufs_exit(struct ufs_hba *hba)
> +{
> + struct exynos_ufs *ufs = ufshcd_get_variant(hba);
> +
> + phy_power_off(ufs->phy);
> + phy_exit(ufs->phy);
> +}
> +
> +
For future patches, please follow the convention that is used elsewhere
in the kernel and separate functions with a single blank line instead of
two.
Thanks,
Bart.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists