netdev - Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] wilc1000: Add reset/enable GPIO support to SPI driver

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: <87bl1bmznw.fsf@tynnyri.adurom.net>
Date:   Mon, 20 Dec 2021 10:46:43 +0200
From:   Kalle Valo <kvalo@...nel.org>
To:     David Mosberger-Tang <davidm@...uge.net>
Cc:     Claudiu.Beznea@...rochip.com, Ajay.Kathat@...rochip.com,
        adham.abozaeid@...rochip.com, davem@...emloft.net,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, kuba@...nel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, robh+dt@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] wilc1000: Add reset/enable GPIO support to SPI driver

David Mosberger-Tang <davidm@...uge.net> writes:

> On Thu, 2021-12-16 at 10:10 +0200, Kalle Valo wrote:
>> David Mosberger-Tang <davidm@...uge.net> writes:
>> 
>> > > > +       } else {
>> > > > +               gpiod_set_value(gpios->reset, 1);       /* assert RESET */
>> > > > +               gpiod_set_value(gpios->enable, 0);      /* deassert ENABLE */
>> > > 
>> > > I don't usually see comments near the code line in kernel. Maybe move them
>> > > before the actual code line or remove them at all as the code is impler enough?
>> > 
>> > You're kidding, right?
>> 
>> I agree with Claudiu, the comments are not really providing more
>> information from what can be seen from the code. And the style of having
>> the comment in the same line is not commonly used in upstream.
>
> The code is obvious if you think of 1 as "assert" and 0 as "deassert".  It looks
> utterly wrong if you think of 1 as outputting 3.3V and 0 as outputting 0V.

Yeah, I guess for people who are more hardware orientated that looks
wrong :)

> But if you insist, I'll remove the comments.

I don't insist removing the comments, but please move them to their own
line so that the style is consistent.

-- 
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/

https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches