linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 4/5] iio: mcp9600: Recognize chip id for mcp9601

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAHp75VdbfCenb+N4rY59hG1E9DL9s4ibCdQX=Ar8hT0_wi5h+Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2025 19:47:39 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: Ben Collins <bcollins@...ter.com>
Cc: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>, David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com>, 
	Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@...log.com>, 
	Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, 
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, 
	Andrew Hepp <andrew.hepp@...pp.dev>, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, 
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 4/5] iio: mcp9600: Recognize chip id for mcp9601

On Fri, Aug 22, 2025 at 7:07 PM Ben Collins <bcollins@...ter.com> wrote:
> > On Aug 22, 2025, at 11:57 AM, Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 22, 2025 at 4:24 PM Ben Collins <bcollins@...ter.com> wrote:

...

> >> +struct mcp9600_data {
> >> +       struct i2c_client *client;
> >> +};
> >> +
> >
> >> -struct mcp9600_data {
> >> -       struct i2c_client *client;
> >> -};
> >> -
> >
> > Seems we discussed this. And my suggestion was to defer the change to
> > when it will be needed.
>
> And my response was that it’s needed in 5/5 where I add the mcp9600_config()
> function. That function will need to be before mcp9600_channels[] in the
> IIR patch series.
>
> So either I move mcp9600_data now, or I leave it and put mcp9600_config()
> below it, and then in the IIR series I’ll have to move both up.
>
> Didn’t seem to make sense to move 30 lines of code later when I can move
> 3 lines now.

TBH, I have no strong preference, I leave this to Jonathan and other reviewers.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko