From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751901AbeFEIQp (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jun 2018 04:16:45 -0400 Received: from mail-wm0-f67.google.com ([74.125.82.67]:54079 "EHLO mail-wm0-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751865AbeFEIQm (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jun 2018 04:16:42 -0400 X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKIJnLGad5GdCqTF5fLqUC6sYAudmUWwDzwdf5zH24lXmAjgr+pSwQdOUtom4BGpgtVHjXwBxA== Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2018 09:16:38 +0100 From: Lee Jones To: Geert Uytterhoeven Cc: Marek Vasut , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Marek Vasut , Geert Uytterhoeven , Mark Brown , Steve Twiss , Wolfram Sang , Linux-Renesas Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 02/10] mfd: da9063: Use REGMAP_IRQ_REG Message-ID: <20180605080115.GN21163@dell> References: <20180602101155.26375-1-marek.vasut+renesas@gmail.com> <20180602101155.26375-2-marek.vasut+renesas@gmail.com> <20180604122624.GB21163@dell> <20180605070913.GH21163@dell> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 05 Jun 2018, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Lee, > > On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 9:09 AM, Lee Jones wrote: > > On Mon, 04 Jun 2018, Marek Vasut wrote: > >> On 06/04/2018 02:26 PM, Lee Jones wrote: > >> > On Sat, 02 Jun 2018, Marek Vasut wrote: > >> >> Convert the regmap_irq table to use REGMAP_IRQ_REG(). > >> >> > >> >> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut > >> >> Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven > >> >> Cc: Lee Jones > >> >> Cc: Mark Brown > >> >> Cc: Steve Twiss > >> >> Cc: Wolfram Sang > >> >> Cc: linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org > >> >> --- > >> >> V3: New patch > >> >> Note: A sed oneliner was used: > >> >> sed -i "/\[DA9063_IRQ_/ {N;N;N;s/\n//g;s/.*\[\(DA9063_IRQ_[^]]\+\)].*reg_offset = \([^,]\+\),.* = \([^,]\+\),.*/\tREGMAP_IRQ_REG(\1, \2, \3),/}" drivers/mfd/da9063-irq.c > >> >> --- > >> >> drivers/mfd/da9063-irq.c | 145 ++++++++++------------------------------------- > >> >> 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 116 deletions(-) > >> >> > >> >> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/da9063-irq.c b/drivers/mfd/da9063-irq.c > >> >> index 207bbfe55449..5b406ecfc14a 100644 > >> >> --- a/drivers/mfd/da9063-irq.c > >> >> +++ b/drivers/mfd/da9063-irq.c > >> >> @@ -28,125 +28,38 @@ > >> >> > >> >> static const struct regmap_irq da9063_irqs[] = { > >> >> /* DA9063 event A register */ > >> >> - [DA9063_IRQ_ONKEY] = { > >> >> - .reg_offset = DA9063_REG_EVENT_A_OFFSET, > >> >> - .mask = DA9063_M_ONKEY, > >> >> - }, > >> >> - [DA9063_IRQ_ALARM] = { > >> >> - .reg_offset = DA9063_REG_EVENT_A_OFFSET, > >> >> - .mask = DA9063_M_ALARM, > >> >> - }, > >> >> - [DA9063_IRQ_TICK] = { > >> >> - .reg_offset = DA9063_REG_EVENT_A_OFFSET, > >> >> - .mask = DA9063_M_TICK, > >> >> - }, > >> >> - [DA9063_IRQ_ADC_RDY] = { > >> >> - .reg_offset = DA9063_REG_EVENT_A_OFFSET, > >> >> - .mask = DA9063_M_ADC_RDY, > >> >> - }, > >> >> - [DA9063_IRQ_SEQ_RDY] = { > >> >> - .reg_offset = DA9063_REG_EVENT_A_OFFSET, > >> >> - .mask = DA9063_M_SEQ_RDY, > >> >> - }, > >> >> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_ONKEY, DA9063_REG_EVENT_A_OFFSET, DA9063_M_ONKEY), > >> >> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_ALARM, DA9063_REG_EVENT_A_OFFSET, DA9063_M_ALARM), > >> >> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_TICK, DA9063_REG_EVENT_A_OFFSET, DA9063_M_TICK), > >> >> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_ADC_RDY, DA9063_REG_EVENT_A_OFFSET, DA9063_M_ADC_RDY), > >> >> + REGMAP_IRQ_REG(DA9063_IRQ_SEQ_RDY, DA9063_REG_EVENT_A_OFFSET, DA9063_M_SEQ_RDY), > >> > > >> > Nice, but I think checkpatch.pl would complain. > >> > > >> > Better to break after the first argument I think. > >> > >> Doesn't really help the readability, but done. > > > > I don't make the rules. :) > > Documentation/process/coding-style.rst: > > "Statements longer than 80 columns will be broken into sensible chunks, unless > exceeding 80 columns significantly increases readability and does not hide > information." Operative word here is "significantly". > > Personally /me is hoping that the 80 char limit is lifted to ~120 soon. > > Please no ;-) Maybe 120 is pushing it a little, but 80 is so 19xx? ... well, 80! -- Lee Jones [李琼斯] Linaro Services Technical Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog