Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752897AbaFRQfa (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Jun 2014 12:35:30 -0400 Received: from mail-ve0-f173.google.com ([209.85.128.173]:37420 "EHLO mail-ve0-f173.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750862AbaFRQf2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Jun 2014 12:35:28 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20140618075316.GI21030@lee--X1> References: <1402954800-28215-1-git-send-email-dianders@chromium.org> <1402954800-28215-4-git-send-email-dianders@chromium.org> <20140618075316.GI21030@lee--X1> Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 09:35:27 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: u6bJwb_PGAVp2s-gXUVHzGIFD7o Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/10] mfd: cros_ec: Allow static din/dout buffers with cros_ec_register() From: Doug Anderson To: Lee Jones Cc: Andrew Bresticker , Stephen Warren , Olof Johansson , Sonny Rao , linux-samsung-soc , Javier Martinez Canillas , Bill Richardson , Simon Glass , Wolfram Sang , "broonie@kernel.org" , Samuel Ortiz , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Lee, On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 12:53 AM, Lee Jones wrote: > On Mon, 16 Jun 2014, Doug Anderson wrote: > >> From: Bill Richardson >> >> The lower-level driver may want to provide its own buffers. If so, >> there's no need to allocate new ones. This already happens to work >> just fine (since we check for size of 0 and use devm allocation), but >> it's good to document it. >> >> [dianders: Resolved conflicts; documented that no code changes needed >> on mainline] >> >> Signed-off-by: Bill Richardson >> Signed-off-by: Doug Anderson >> --- >> include/linux/mfd/cros_ec.h | 4 ++-- >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/include/linux/mfd/cros_ec.h b/include/linux/mfd/cros_ec.h >> index 7e9fe6e..2ee3190 100644 >> --- a/include/linux/mfd/cros_ec.h >> +++ b/include/linux/mfd/cros_ec.h >> @@ -68,8 +68,8 @@ struct cros_ec_msg { >> * We use this alignment to keep ARM and x86 happy. Probably word >> * alignment would be OK, there might be a small performance advantage >> * to using dword. >> - * @din_size: size of din buffer >> - * @dout_size: size of dout buffer >> + * @din_size: size of din buffer to allocate (zero to use static din) >> + * @dout_size: size of dout buffer to allocate (zero to use static dout) > > Why don't these use your new format i.e. doutsize, etc? Ah, you mean like the new "struct cros_ec_command" that's switched to in (mfd: cros_ec: Use struct cros_ec_command to communicate with the EC)? I don't know--it seems rather arbitrary. Personally I like having the underscore (thus if we have to change I'd advocate changing "struct cros_ec_command"). The inconsistency doesn't bother me terribly and it will be more work to cherry-pick future patches. Since it didn't sound like you are insisting then I won't change this, but if you say that you want me to change it I'm more than happy to. -Doug -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/