Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Tue, 25 Sep 2018 21:47:25 +0530
From:   Nishad Kamdar <nishadkamdar@gmail.com>
To:     Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc:     NeilBrown <neil@brown.name>, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org,
        Christian =?utf-8?Q?L=C3=BCtke-Stetzkamp?= <christian@lkamp.de>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, John Crispin <blogic@openwrt.org>,
        Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] staging: mt7621-mmc: Fix single statement macros in
 sd.c
Message-ID: <20180925161723.GA23387@nishad>
References: <20180923093805.GA20870@nishad>
 <b0f415b5b9655571374ab30e37406b494d07bc45.camel@perches.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <b0f415b5b9655571374ab30e37406b494d07bc45.camel@perches.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 06:31:32AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Sun, 2018-09-23 at 15:08 +0530, Nishad Kamdar wrote:
> > This patch fixes a few single statement macros in sd.c.
> > It converts two macros to inline functions. It removes
> > five other macros and replaces their usages with calls to
> > the function being called in the macro definition.
> > Issue found by checkpatch.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Nishad Kamdar <nishadkamdar@gmail.com>
> > ---
> > Changes in v2:
> >   - Convert msdc_gate_clk() and msdc_ungate_clk() to inline functions.
> >   - Delete msdc_irq_restore(), msdc_vcore_on(), msdc_vcore_off(),
> >     msdc_vdd_on() and msdc_vdd_off() and replace their usages directly
> >     with calls to the function being called by these macros.
> 
> Nishad, do please look again for uses of these functions
> you are changing.
> 
> Please try removing all the #if 0 blocks instead, and then
> see if there are also now unused functions from those removed
> blocks that could also be removed.
> 
> And Greg, if you look at this, look at the odd license of
> these files.
> 
> It's possible the license is incompatible with the GPL.
> 
Ok, I'll look into that.

thanks for the review.

regards,
nishad