Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <0d4d77db-3d09-a5ab-b3e6-93da771b4b2d@linaro.org>
Date:   Thu, 8 Jun 2023 09:00:14 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.11.2
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/5] phy: realtek: usb: Add driver for the Realtek SoC
 USB 2.0 PHY
Content-Language: en-US
To:     =?UTF-8?B?U3RhbmxleSBDaGFuZ1vmmIzogrLlvrdd?= 
        <stanley_chang@realtek.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>,
        Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@kernel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
        Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
        Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>,
        Michael Grzeschik <m.grzeschik@pengutronix.de>,
        Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@linux.intel.com>,
        Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com>,
        Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@chromium.org>,
        Ray Chi <raychi@google.com>,
        Flavio Suligoi <f.suligoi@asem.it>,
        "linux-phy@lists.infradead.org" <linux-phy@lists.infradead.org>,
        "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-usb@vger.kernel.org" <linux-usb@vger.kernel.org>
References: <20230607062500.24669-1-stanley_chang@realtek.com>
 <20230607062500.24669-2-stanley_chang@realtek.com>
 <79201bd6-6048-7013-aeb7-34d218139844@linaro.org>
 <8cb2d82c3b484262aa866c5e989fc8cd@realtek.com>
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
In-Reply-To: <8cb2d82c3b484262aa866c5e989fc8cd@realtek.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On 08/06/2023 08:59, Stanley Chang[昌育德] wrote:
> Hi Krzysztof,
> 
> 
>> I commented on your second patch, but everything is applicable here as well.
>> You have many useless debug messages. Many incorrect or useless
>> "if() return" which point to broken driver design (e.g. concurrent access to half
>> initialized structures where you substitute lack of synchronization with
>> incorrect "if() return"). Undocumented user interface is one more big trouble.
>>
>> I doubt you run checkpatch on this (be sure to run it with --strict and fix almost
>> everything).
>>
>>
> 1. I use checkpatch but without --strict. I will add it add and check again.
> 2. Do the debugfs interfaces need to provide a document?
> I don't find any reference about this.

debugfs interface is for debug but in your case you don't use it that way.


Best regards,
Krzysztof