Re: [PATCH 1/2] spi: add Intel Mid SSP driver

[Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>]

On Tue, 2013-10-29 at 12:32 -0700, David Cohen wrote:
> On 10/29/2013 11:35 AM, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Tue, 2013-10-29 at 11:30 -0700, David Cohen wrote:
> >> On 10/29/2013 11:19 AM, Joe Perches wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 2013-10-29 at 11:05 -0700, David Cohen wrote:
> >>>> This patch adds driver for ssp spi interface on Intel Mid platform.
> >>> A few simple notes:
> >>> Please consider using checkpatch.
> >> I did and got no warnings. But haven't used --strict option.
> > Interesting.  I thought there was a return (foo);
> > statement that should have been marked, but I didn't
> > actually run checkpatch.
> 
> It seems odd checkpatch didn't catch it. I'll investigate.

No need.  I believe I know why.
checkpatch doesn't use "$balanced_parens" checks for return
tests.  I'm not sure it's worth fixing right now, but it
could be tested as:

	if ($^V && $^V ge 5.10.0 &&
	    $stat =~ /^.\s*return\s*$balanced_parens\s*;\s*$/)

> > static inline u32 is_rx_fifo_empty(struct ssp_drv_context *sspc)
> > +{
> > +       return ((read_SSSR(sspc->ioaddr) & SSSR_RNE) == 0);
> > +}
> > This could be bool too
> u32 seems unusual, but I'd prefer 'int' if it's fine for you.

Anything is_<foo> that returns what seems to be true/false
I think could be bool.

But, no worries, it's your code.  Do what you think best.