Remove unnecessary blank lines for cleanup.
Signed-off-by: Anson Huang <[email protected]>
---
drivers/irqchip/irq-imx-gpcv2.c | 2 --
1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-imx-gpcv2.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-imx-gpcv2.c
index 4f74c15..4f11b9b 100644
--- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-imx-gpcv2.c
+++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-imx-gpcv2.c
@@ -17,7 +17,6 @@
#define GPC_IMR1_CORE2 0x1c0
#define GPC_IMR1_CORE3 0x1d0
-
struct gpcv2_irqchip_data {
struct raw_spinlock rlock;
void __iomem *gpc_base;
@@ -287,6 +286,5 @@ static int __init imx_gpcv2_irqchip_init(struct device_node *node,
of_node_clear_flag(node, OF_POPULATED);
return 0;
}
-
IRQCHIP_DECLARE(imx_gpcv2_imx7d, "fsl,imx7d-gpc", imx_gpcv2_irqchip_init);
IRQCHIP_DECLARE(imx_gpcv2_imx8mq, "fsl,imx8mq-gpc", imx_gpcv2_irqchip_init);
--
2.7.4
On Tue, 17 Mar 2020 04:56:41 +0000,
Anson Huang <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Remove unnecessary blank lines for cleanup.
>
> Signed-off-by: Anson Huang <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/irqchip/irq-imx-gpcv2.c | 2 --
> 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-imx-gpcv2.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-imx-gpcv2.c
> index 4f74c15..4f11b9b 100644
> --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-imx-gpcv2.c
> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-imx-gpcv2.c
> @@ -17,7 +17,6 @@
> #define GPC_IMR1_CORE2 0x1c0
> #define GPC_IMR1_CORE3 0x1d0
>
> -
> struct gpcv2_irqchip_data {
> struct raw_spinlock rlock;
> void __iomem *gpc_base;
> @@ -287,6 +286,5 @@ static int __init imx_gpcv2_irqchip_init(struct device_node *node,
> of_node_clear_flag(node, OF_POPULATED);
> return 0;
> }
> -
> IRQCHIP_DECLARE(imx_gpcv2_imx7d, "fsl,imx7d-gpc", imx_gpcv2_irqchip_init);
> IRQCHIP_DECLARE(imx_gpcv2_imx8mq, "fsl,imx8mq-gpc", imx_gpcv2_irqchip_init);
I honestly don't think this deserves a patch. Next time you work on
this driver, add the cleanups to it. But on its own, it's only churn.
Thanks,
M.
--
Jazz is not dead, it just smells funny.
On Sat, Mar 21, 2020 at 5:22 PM Marc Zyngier <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 17 Mar 2020 04:56:41 +0000,
> Anson Huang <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Remove unnecessary blank lines for cleanup.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Anson Huang <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > drivers/irqchip/irq-imx-gpcv2.c | 2 --
> > 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-imx-gpcv2.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-imx-gpcv2.c
> > index 4f74c15..4f11b9b 100644
> > --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-imx-gpcv2.c
> > +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-imx-gpcv2.c
> > @@ -17,7 +17,6 @@
> > #define GPC_IMR1_CORE2 0x1c0
> > #define GPC_IMR1_CORE3 0x1d0
> >
> > -
> > struct gpcv2_irqchip_data {
> > struct raw_spinlock rlock;
> > void __iomem *gpc_base;
> > @@ -287,6 +286,5 @@ static int __init imx_gpcv2_irqchip_init(struct device_node *node,
> > of_node_clear_flag(node, OF_POPULATED);
> > return 0;
> > }
> > -
> > IRQCHIP_DECLARE(imx_gpcv2_imx7d, "fsl,imx7d-gpc", imx_gpcv2_irqchip_init);
> > IRQCHIP_DECLARE(imx_gpcv2_imx8mq, "fsl,imx8mq-gpc", imx_gpcv2_irqchip_init);
>
> I honestly don't think this deserves a patch. Next time you work on
> this driver, add the cleanups to it. But on its own, it's only churn.
While you are technically right, it's only churn I think we need this
for code consistency and cleanup.
Even if we fix this when we work on the driver we still need
to make the cleanup in a separate patch.
My 2 cents,
Daniel.
Daniel,
On 2020-03-22 19:08, Daniel Baluta wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 21, 2020 at 5:22 PM Marc Zyngier <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 17 Mar 2020 04:56:41 +0000,
>> Anson Huang <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> > Remove unnecessary blank lines for cleanup.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Anson Huang <[email protected]>
>> > ---
>> > drivers/irqchip/irq-imx-gpcv2.c | 2 --
>> > 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-imx-gpcv2.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-imx-gpcv2.c
>> > index 4f74c15..4f11b9b 100644
>> > --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-imx-gpcv2.c
>> > +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-imx-gpcv2.c
>> > @@ -17,7 +17,6 @@
>> > #define GPC_IMR1_CORE2 0x1c0
>> > #define GPC_IMR1_CORE3 0x1d0
>> >
>> > -
>> > struct gpcv2_irqchip_data {
>> > struct raw_spinlock rlock;
>> > void __iomem *gpc_base;
>> > @@ -287,6 +286,5 @@ static int __init imx_gpcv2_irqchip_init(struct device_node *node,
>> > of_node_clear_flag(node, OF_POPULATED);
>> > return 0;
>> > }
>> > -
>> > IRQCHIP_DECLARE(imx_gpcv2_imx7d, "fsl,imx7d-gpc", imx_gpcv2_irqchip_init);
>> > IRQCHIP_DECLARE(imx_gpcv2_imx8mq, "fsl,imx8mq-gpc", imx_gpcv2_irqchip_init);
>>
>> I honestly don't think this deserves a patch. Next time you work on
>> this driver, add the cleanups to it. But on its own, it's only churn.
>
> While you are technically right, it's only churn I think we need this
> for code consistency and cleanup.
Get real. We really don't. Two blank lines do not lead to a
misinterpretation of the code, do not get in the way of normal
maintenance, do not lead to *any* practical issue.
What's next? Cc stable?
> Even if we fix this when we work on the driver we still need
> to make the cleanup in a separate patch.
Neither. As well as removing blank lines, you could also remove the
dead code in this driver. That would be a good cleanup. You could
also have a look at what feels like a potential deadlock in the
mask/unmask callbacks. That'd be a good thing to do too.
Certainly more useful than just dropping two blank lines.
M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...