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=-2.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,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 ED5DFC17440 for ; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 13:33:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4EF421783 for ; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 13:33:18 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ti.com header.i=@ti.com header.b="u7uD8Ksb" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727275AbfKLNdR (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Nov 2019 08:33:17 -0500 Received: from fllv0015.ext.ti.com ([198.47.19.141]:33358 "EHLO fllv0015.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725865AbfKLNdR (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Nov 2019 08:33:17 -0500 Received: from fllv0035.itg.ti.com ([10.64.41.0]) by fllv0015.ext.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id xACDWqEC028139; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 07:32:52 -0600 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ti.com; s=ti-com-17Q1; t=1573565572; bh=5Z4gxvkjzCKXoR2E/PLowayTQFLHdnvuiFx2gsQMpOw=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=u7uD8Ksb6+SkNTw/B+CguxskxxpzqJhuWCzD1BViIVLYjjyl6h5IkXu4sceepscOt dw2KPu100PEy9jPMXyfIsQ6VvHaJpPwNv0UTysey8ik3vfarPd3g4OqL3XIEY0n6f/ 63b+XNLUiCKXDHX+xGxKrLy+Mb9P7pwhuBDao1Q0= Received: from DLEE108.ent.ti.com (dlee108.ent.ti.com [157.170.170.38]) by fllv0035.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id xACDWppt074078; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 07:32:52 -0600 Received: from DLEE114.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.25) by DLEE108.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.38) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1847.3; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 07:32:51 -0600 Received: from fllv0039.itg.ti.com (10.64.41.19) by DLEE114.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.25) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1847.3 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 07:32:34 -0600 Received: from ti.com (ileax41-snat.itg.ti.com [10.172.224.153]) by fllv0039.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with SMTP id xACDWpgg005332; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 07:32:51 -0600 Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2019 07:35:54 -0600 From: Benoit Parrot To: Sakari Ailus CC: Hans Verkuil , , Rob Herring , , Subject: Re: [Patch v2 12/20] media: ti-vpe: cal: Add DRA76x support Message-ID: <20191112133554.u7mbv6h2bzecvakl@ti.com> References: <20191104193140.31145-1-bparrot@ti.com> <20191104193140.31145-13-bparrot@ti.com> <20191106085709.GB6253@valkosipuli.retiisi.org.uk> <20191106205839.3zxqdttlqmrzghla@ti.com> <20191112132811.p6xgmxp7co6ugkkn@ti.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20191112132811.p6xgmxp7co6ugkkn@ti.com> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20171215 X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: e1e8a2fd-e40a-4ac6-ac9b-f7e9cc9ee180 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Benoit Parrot wrote on Tue [2019-Nov-12 07:28:11 -0600]: > Benoit Parrot wrote on Wed [2019-Nov-06 14:58:39 -0600]: > > Sakari Ailus wrote on Wed [2019-Nov-06 10:57:09 +0200]: > > > Hi Benoit, > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 01:31:32PM -0600, Benoit Parrot wrote: > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > +static struct cal_data dra76x_cal_data = { > > > > > > const? > > > > Hmm, most likely. > > Well, it turns out they cannot be constified because we need to be able to > update the register offset fir the regmap used for the syscon object. > So I'll leave them as is. Oh I guess you meant just the "static struct cal_data" ones? I tried making the other one into const but obviously that didn't work. But just constifying "static struct cal_data" appears to compiled just fine. > > Benoit > > > > > > > > > > + .csi2_phy_core = dra76x_cal_csi_phy, > > > > + .num_csi2_phy = ARRAY_SIZE(dra76x_cal_csi_phy), > > > > + > > > > > > This newline seems extra. > > > > > > > + .flags = 0, > > > > > > And flags will be zero in any case, as one more struct members are assigned > > > to. > > > > Is this guaranteed or compiler version dependent? > > > > > > > > > +}; > > > > > > -- > > > Regards, > > > > > > Sakari Ailus