From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32E76C433E6 for ; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 09:39:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06C482075B for ; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 09:39:22 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=axentia.se header.i=@axentia.se header.b="GBX+IFTz" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728690AbgH1JjV (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Aug 2020 05:39:21 -0400 Received: from mail-eopbgr10102.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([40.107.1.102]:47469 "EHLO EUR02-HE1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728897AbgH1JjT (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Aug 2020 05:39:19 -0400 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=ckU0kA8bUDg25cavNqpstsPFCKvm938xSPUbaoq79ySV9C6Vh/sKOfe5MEmfUkFlgPdqPDn9YfgfbIM71CahF6Lur6rq6ldzxJ0LM+OTPWL6E1qHxYfDseaWGnxq2IBk8cqNPV11ajqF9HDTdIGIIsjMKuHFb4/2UDU3SCn/mrAAJcHRcQc0JMFurAtSbohF8FdxhdsSo8/5CK9DGSwSQgwZEGx5oob9BThLe6wIVQ4xpbD03PHxq3KpZWhQVMPuopAdPlnuGhS4M7woiUDky65RuCD81i9dAMMueyfEjsNUF5ygeLHJJPUDOCom/eKWJeXxiPUFr4KTAG7SMxqYmg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=EER4D2xVJD6DObDGorq4b4FhD/JtHZlKesJ19VEQNzQ=; b=eEjWFiUiKADZIHXduQY6evxoK+Ty/JjZLn8hz0vvTk2k99uaTpncOleMiLAH6dg/woqyzHAypz5xO9a3MXhQGBUxgH2y+GzdnHqIiHMvzGWryuMzi8mQffmkUl9cJ613Vg2xY6FspFvgIrbnyQu22u5RoxhLDx6nYle6uCvluGRzcWj9n8i0PK51gIhAnQYuSPj5CTgWaoyVxzrBW3qu0AFIEL7IyPyQgynzmvte9ws8ABr+qz6ZrjV1W0chKCbagVyAx9T3Qmf0l809CiFwYIMkjBknJgGzhFus+KSmW5l3W3LUNs8l+eaFrHBJPapvNbFkj/dMasUefIIVoQnfOQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=axentia.se; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=axentia.se; dkim=pass header.d=axentia.se; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=axentia.se; s=selector2; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=EER4D2xVJD6DObDGorq4b4FhD/JtHZlKesJ19VEQNzQ=; b=GBX+IFTzIi6hk9LR/Pas/SDdHImdNm95dpMf+fUtqQs6zPmt0O7XmpNTlPhuFDk0wAf0m9KkIk85A+Ww72xBf2CNhPOFRbLKn6nEw9HQVsqwChfhd63JerULlZ+Vt6PxmZfnFwvFyWEaHStzUzytk6vxp+3Y3xZ4SsX+H3+pb7U= Authentication-Results: st-md-mailman.stormreply.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;st-md-mailman.stormreply.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=axentia.se; Received: from DB8PR02MB5482.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:10:eb::29) by DB8PR02MB5963.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:10:fa::20) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3326.21; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 09:39:12 +0000 Received: from DB8PR02MB5482.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::3890:7b1:97a6:1e47]) by DB8PR02MB5482.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::3890:7b1:97a6:1e47%7]) with mapi id 15.20.3326.021; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 09:39:12 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 09/18] iio: afe: iio-rescale: Simplify with dev_err_probe() To: Krzysztof Kozlowski Cc: Jonathan Cameron , Hartmut Knaack , Lars-Peter Clausen , Peter Meerwald-Stadler , Kukjin Kim , Michael Hennerich , Kevin Hilman , Neil Armstrong , Jerome Brunet , Martin Blumenstingl , Marek Vasut , Maxime Coquelin , Alexandre Torgue , Beniamin Bia , Tomasz Duszynski , Linus Walleij , Andy Shevchenko , linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, "linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org" , linux-amlogic@lists.infradead.org, linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com References: <20200827192642.1725-1-krzk@kernel.org> <20200827192642.1725-9-krzk@kernel.org> <20200828062443.GA17343@pi3> <3a5cb59b-454e-2c3f-9f31-43147e843c66@axentia.se> From: Peter Rosin Organization: Axentia Technologies AB Message-ID: Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2020 11:39:06 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.11.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: sv-SE Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ClientProxiedBy: HE1PR0402CA0001.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:3:d0::11) To DB8PR02MB5482.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:10:eb::29) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-MessageSentRepresentingType: 1 Received: from [192.168.13.3] (85.226.217.78) by HE1PR0402CA0001.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:3:d0::11) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3326.19 via Frontend Transport; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 09:39:09 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [85.226.217.78] X-MS-PublicTrafficType: Email X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id: 9ed3dfb1-6a22-4589-f0dc-08d84b363831 X-MS-TrafficTypeDiagnostic: DB8PR02MB5963: X-Microsoft-Antispam-PRVS: X-MS-Oob-TLC-OOBClassifiers: OLM:1148; X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck: 1 X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0; X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: XTd8DqynySNqAAJtw9purTjVqgkJCArFCtgGBUXJPWMk4oUMl22DbfgaMdz5y6tHRu+Z34Y9mg+lHQ+G3+AZJnB+RJxDMLH0QKV5c2Vy8zQpbi+ZIbd10rvAZoW11x7uYq7a9Wgu6iUVPQ16N6+K+XW8G7eedtSgJMpHFkH+h6Ms2Y8SnQ3vGtbsZOitZjWCf9yehqxtbj2fUHwLsWYXDdYLvS2WlmBrjGmiiQYx2AXhS9uIYlTiWE2uTq1hV/N1Y64sznyM3wNti/nkNfW6jjit2n05p/1zI6HGenOPH8UEtJ7bLkLPwLpYDn94/OdEjd/ptmMzQLHxnzKjb6qHhrv1DuaSHs7kURHPfcashNbGDVbI0petAlQePLhtyaGc X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:255.255.255.255;CTRY:;LANG:en;SCL:1;SRV:;IPV:NLI;SFV:NSPM;H:DB8PR02MB5482.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com;PTR:;CAT:NONE;SFS:(346002)(136003)(396003)(39830400003)(376002)(366004)(186003)(53546011)(26005)(86362001)(66946007)(36756003)(16526019)(36916002)(66476007)(52116002)(54906003)(8936002)(31686004)(6486002)(2906002)(7416002)(316002)(66556008)(83380400001)(5660300002)(8676002)(956004)(478600001)(31696002)(6666004)(2616005)(6916009)(16576012)(4326008)(43740500002);DIR:OUT;SFP:1102; X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData: 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 X-OriginatorOrg: axentia.se X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 9ed3dfb1-6a22-4589-f0dc-08d84b363831 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: DB8PR02MB5482.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Aug 2020 09:39:11.9207 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 4ee68585-03e1-4785-942a-df9c1871a234 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-MailboxType: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-UserPrincipalName: BXh13lGNev0aiotYE+QTZLXyzYRvdCwLAtJqH/a/ess20cFCKz3nyHzYhEQXS3GM X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DB8PR02MB5963 Sender: linux-iio-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-iio@vger.kernel.org On 2020-08-28 09:03, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 at 08:58, Peter Rosin wrote: >>>> I'm not a huge fan of adding *one* odd line breaking the 80 column >>>> recommendation to any file. I like to be able to fit multiple >>>> windows side by side in a meaningful way. Also, I don't like having >>>> a shitload of emptiness on my screen, which is what happens when some >>>> lines are longer and you want to see it all. I strongly believe that >>>> the 80 column rule/recommendation is still as valid as it ever was. >>>> It's just hard to read longish lines; there's a reason newspapers >>>> columns are quite narrow... >>>> >>>> Same comment for the envelope-detector (3/18). >>>> >>>> You will probably never look at these files again, but *I* might have >>>> to revisit them for one reason or another, and these long lines will >>>> annoy me when that happens. >>> >>> Initially I posted it with 80-characters wrap. Then I received a comment >>> - better to stick to the new 100, as checkpatch accepts it. >>> >>> Now you write, better to go back to 80. >>> >>> Maybe then someone else will write to me, better to go to 100. >>> >>> And another person will reply, no, coding style still mentions 80, so >>> keep it at 80. >>> >>> Sure guys, please first decide which one you prefer, then I will wrap it >>> accordingly. :) >>> >>> Otherwise I will just jump from one to another depending on one person's >>> personal preference. >>> >>> If there is no consensus among discussing people, I find this 100 line >>> more readable, already got review, checkpatch accepts it so if subsystem >>> maintainer likes it, I prefer to leave it like this. >> >> I'm not impressed by that argument. For the files I have mentioned, it >> does not matter very much to me if you and some random person think that >> 100 columns might *slightly* improve readability. >> >> Quoting coding-style >> >> Statements longer than 80 columns should be broken into sensible chunks, >> unless exceeding 80 columns significantly increases readability and does >> not hide information. >> >> Notice that word? *significantly* > > Notice also checkpatch change... How is that relevant? checkpatch has *never* had the final say and its heuristics can never be perfect. Meanwhile, coding style is talking about exactly the case under discussion, and agrees with me perfectly. > First of all, I don't have a preference over wrapping here. As I said, > I sent v1 with 80 and got a response to change it to 100. You want me > basically to bounce from A to B to A to B. > >> Why do I even have to speak up about this? WTF? > > Because we all share here our ideas... > >> For the patches that touch files that I originally wrote [1], my >> preference should be clear by now. > > I understood your preference. There is nothing unclear here. Other > person had different preference. I told you my arguments that it is > not reasonable to jump A->B->A->B just because each person has a > different view. At the end it's the subsystem maintainer's decision as > he wants to keep his subsystem clean. Yeah, I bet he is thrilled about it. Cheers, Peter