Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757667Ab0FBJhO (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Jun 2010 05:37:14 -0400 Received: from mail-gy0-f174.google.com ([209.85.160.174]:48916 "EHLO mail-gy0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753954Ab0FBJhN convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Jun 2010 05:37:13 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=fYC/djhgQ/J3rPEgsA3noYeonEG/TmB2L9V04F/Tu+0t/L08+dkrHA4UMc7JXpDxjX xcMaasWw9qvFoU55iwy6zHpASZxYksGyQV/gez8o7dIfyQfl5FL/RddIaAF1Bqpnelka 5rIbiC3eEE/4WzuAjYdGOPWAxgtiPIewgzog0= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1275468694.2545.1.camel@eight.analog.com> From: Mike Frysinger Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 05:36:52 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [Uclinux-dist-devel] [PATCH v2] regulator: new drivers for AD5398 and AD5821 To: Sonic Zhang Cc: Mark Brown , Liam Girdwood , uclinux-dist-devel , Linux Kernel Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1990 Lines: 56 On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 05:29, Sonic Zhang wrote: > On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 5:02 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 04:51, sonic zhang wrote: >>> The AD5398 and AD5821 are single 10-bit DAC with 120 mA output current >>> sink capability. They feature an internal reference and operates from >>> a single 2.7 V to 5.5 V supply. >>> >>> This driver supports both the AD5398 and the AD5821.  It adapts into the >>> voltage and current framework. >>> >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Sonic Zhang >> >> the "From:" doesnt match your s-o-b tag ... > > Does this need to be matched? I prefer to discuss via gmail account > while keep company email in the patch owner information. so set the From: in the body as the first line like git-send-email does it: From: --- .......... >>> +static const struct ad5398_current_data_format ad5398_df = {10, 4}; >>> +static const struct ad5398_current_data_format ad5821_df = {10, 4}; >>> + >>> +static const struct i2c_device_id ad5398_id[] = { >>> +       { "ad5398", (kernel_ulong_t)&ad5398_df }, >>> +       { "ad5821", (kernel_ulong_t)&ad5821_df }, >>> +       { } >>> +}; >> >> do you really need sep storage for these _df vars ? > > Yes, this makes probe code simpler. how does it make any difference to the probe code what each id is pointing to ? it isnt comparing the private data pointers to any other storage pointers. from what i can see, this should give the same exact behavior: static const struct ad5398_current_data_format df_10_4 = {10, 4}; static const struct i2c_device_id ad5398_id[] = { { "ad5398", (kernel_ulong_t)&df_10_4 }, { "ad5821", (kernel_ulong_t)&df_10_4 }, -mike -- 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/