From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: andre.przywara@arm.com (Andre Przywara)
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 13:43:17 +0000
Subject: [PATCH v2 10/10] drivers: PL011: add support for the ARM SBSA
 generic UART
In-Reply-To: <20150312105210.GK8656@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
References: <1425491994-23913-1-git-send-email-andre.przywara@arm.com>
 <1425491994-23913-11-git-send-email-andre.przywara@arm.com>
 <20150312105210.GK8656@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
Message-ID: <550197F5.1020107@arm.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

Hi Russel,

thanks a lot for looking at the patches!

On 12/03/15 10:52, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 05:59:54PM +0000, Andre Przywara wrote:
>> +static struct uart_ops sbsa_uart_pops = {
>> +	.tx_empty	= pl011_tx_empty,
>> +	.set_mctrl	= sbsa_uart_set_mctrl,
>> +	.get_mctrl	= sbsa_uart_get_mctrl,
>> +	.stop_tx	= pl011_stop_tx,
>> +	.start_tx	= pl011_start_tx,
>> +	.stop_rx	= pl011_stop_rx,
>> +	.enable_ms	= NULL,
>> +	.break_ctl	= NULL,
> 
> It is generally accepted that we don't mention pointers/values which are
> initialised to NULL/0 in initialisers.

Right, I forgot to delete those after development where I had them in
explicitly to make sure I covered everything.
Thanks for spotting.

> 
>> +static struct platform_driver arm_sbsa_uart_platform_driver = {
>> +	.probe		= sbsa_uart_probe,
>> +	.remove		= sbsa_uart_remove,
>> +	.driver	= {
>> +		.name	= "sbsa-uart",
>> +		.of_match_table = of_match_ptr(sbsa_uart_match),
>> +	},
>> +};
>> +
>> +module_platform_driver(arm_sbsa_uart_platform_driver);
> 
> No need to open code the initialisation, rather than using the
> module_*_driver() helper macros to avoid the problem which Dave mentioned.
> 
> These macros are only there to avoid having to write out the same boiler
> plate in loads of simple drivers.  As soon as a driver has more than one
> device driver structure in it, it needs to be open coded.

Actually I prepared this already for the ACPI guys, which want to stuff
their ACPI table match function in there - I think then we need the open
coded version. So if you don't mind too much, I'd like to keep it like
this and hope for someone to actually use it ;-)

Cheers,
Andre.