From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: From: Lei Wang Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] EDAC: add EDAC driver for DMC520 Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2019 01:49:29 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20190807144016.GA24328@zn.tnic> <20190819093147.GE4841@zn.tnic> In-Reply-To: <20190819093147.GE4841@zn.tnic> Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-ID: <939E72DF3413FE46891FBAEDDAEC0501@namprd04.prod.outlook.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Borislav Petkov Cc: "james.morse@arm.com" , "robh+dt@kernel.org" , "mark.rutland@arm.com" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "mchehab@kernel.org" , "linux-edac@vger.kernel.org" , "sashal@kernel.org" , "hangl@microsoft.com" , "lewan@microsoft.com" , "ruizhao@microsoft.com" , "scott.branden@broadcom.com" , "yuqing.shen@broadcom.com" , "ray.jui@broadcom.com" List-ID: >> These comments tell how to potentially expand the driver functions to >> support more interrupts besides what are already here. >=20 > I can read that - the question is why are they there and for whom? For > your future colleagues who'll take over this driver or what is those > comments' purpose? >=20 Yes, this is to help open source developers who potentially might want=20 to expand this driver, most likely colleagues, and possibly other=20 developers. >> After edac_mc_alloc(), if succeeds, the above code updates dmc520_edac >> struct data. If moving edac_mc_alloc as suggested, I will need to use >> local variables to store the data, >=20 > Yes, do that pls. >=20 >> Do you mean having an array to keep all the irq_id, and then only >> devm_request_irq on them if all of the platform_get_irq are success? >=20 > No, move it before edac_mc_alloc(). >=20 > In general, do *all* initialization of your hardware first and only > then, when it succeeds, allocate the EDAC structures. >=20 Thanks! I'll address this feedback. -Lei