On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 01:50:55PM +0200, Cl?ment Leger wrote:
> Hi Mark,
Please don't top post, reply in line with needed context. This allows
readers to readily follow the flow of conversation and understand what
you are talking about and also helps ensure that everything in the
discussion is being addressed.
> Sorry, maybe the commit message was not clear enough but actually
> these fields were not initialized so it does not break anything
> (ie, the default values were always used).
When you remove the definition of the struct and declaration of the
variable pointing to it then the code won't compile.
> > This means that your first patch will break the build, to keep things
----- On 16 Apr, 2020, at 14:47, Mark Brown [email protected] wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 01:50:55PM +0200, Clément Leger wrote:
>> Hi Mark,
>
> Please don't top post, reply in line with needed context. This allows
> readers to readily follow the flow of conversation and understand what
> you are talking about and also helps ensure that everything in the
> discussion is being addressed.
Sorry, I'll take care of that.
>
>> Sorry, maybe the commit message was not clear enough but actually
>> these fields were not initialized so it does not break anything
>> (ie, the default values were always used).
>
> When you remove the definition of the struct and declaration of the
> variable pointing to it then the code won't compile.
Yes I know and I took care of that but there is probably a misunderstanding.
There is actually two structs with the same members (dw_chip_info and
chip_data). The first one (chip_info) if it exists, is copied into the
second (chip_data). First patch [1/2] removes the part of code that did
copy these fields. And then second patchs removes the usage of chip_data
fields. Please let me know if I missed something. I tried to recompile it
and there is no build breakage.
Clément
>
> > > This means that your first patch will break the build, to keep things