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=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS 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 73415C2BB85 for ; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 12:58:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EC6C208E4 for ; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 12:58:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2894654AbgDPM6a convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Apr 2020 08:58:30 -0400 Received: from zimbra2.kalray.eu ([92.103.151.219]:46790 "EHLO zimbra2.kalray.eu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2894447AbgDPM61 (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Apr 2020 08:58:27 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra2.kalray.eu (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB4B227E0DCF; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:58:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: from zimbra2.kalray.eu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra2.kalray.eu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id DHH_5V3HGF-F; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:58:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra2.kalray.eu (Postfix) with ESMTP id A277C27E0DD4; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:58:24 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at zimbra2.kalray.eu Received: from zimbra2.kalray.eu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra2.kalray.eu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id zT3WScpoRkvn; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:58:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: from zimbra2.kalray.eu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra2.kalray.eu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F92327E0DD2; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:58:24 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:58:24 +0200 (CEST) From: =?utf-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Leger To: Mark Brown Cc: linux-spi , linux-kernel Message-ID: <1262823717.15763605.1587041904410.JavaMail.zimbra@kalray.eu> In-Reply-To: <20200416124725.GI5354@sirena.org.uk> References: <20200416110823.22565-1-cleger@kalray.eu> <20200416110916.22633-1-cleger@kalray.eu> <20200416110916.22633-2-cleger@kalray.eu> <20200416113539.GG5354@sirena.org.uk> <622416308.15749883.1587037855167.JavaMail.zimbra@kalray.eu> <20200416124725.GI5354@sirena.org.uk> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] spi: dw: remove cs_control and poll_mode members from chip_data MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT X-Originating-IP: [192.168.40.202] X-Mailer: Zimbra 8.8.15_GA_3895 (ZimbraWebClient - FF68 (Linux)/8.8.15_GA_3895) Thread-Topic: remove cs_control and poll_mode members from chip_data Thread-Index: u6+BzXYec9ZWEUrvuKhpkEo14J92aA== Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org ----- On 16 Apr, 2020, at 14:47, Mark Brown broonie@kernel.org wrote: > On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 01:50:55PM +0200, Clément Leger wrote: >> Hi Mark, > > Please don't top post, reply in line with needed context. This allows > readers to readily follow the flow of conversation and understand what > you are talking about and also helps ensure that everything in the > discussion is being addressed. Sorry, I'll take care of that. > >> Sorry, maybe the commit message was not clear enough but actually >> these fields were not initialized so it does not break anything >> (ie, the default values were always used). > > When you remove the definition of the struct and declaration of the > variable pointing to it then the code won't compile. Yes I know and I took care of that but there is probably a misunderstanding. There is actually two structs with the same members (dw_chip_info and chip_data). The first one (chip_info) if it exists, is copied into the second (chip_data). First patch [1/2] removes the part of code that did copy these fields. And then second patchs removes the usage of chip_data fields. Please let me know if I missed something. I tried to recompile it and there is no build breakage. Clément > > > > This means that your first patch will break the build, to keep things