From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753856AbbCJPqZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Mar 2015 11:46:25 -0400 Received: from pandora.arm.linux.org.uk ([78.32.30.218]:35594 "EHLO pandora.arm.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753132AbbCJPqW (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Mar 2015 11:46:22 -0400 Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2015 15:46:11 +0000 From: Russell King - ARM Linux To: Sascha Hauer Cc: Matthias Brugger , YH Chen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Henry Chen , Flora Fu , linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, kernel@pengutronix.de, Yingjoe Chen , Eddie Huang , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] soc: mediatek: Add PMIC wrapper for MT8135 and MT8173 SoCs Message-ID: <20150310154610.GP8656@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <1426000954-7647-1-git-send-email-s.hauer@pengutronix.de> <1426000954-7647-3-git-send-email-s.hauer@pengutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1426000954-7647-3-git-send-email-s.hauer@pengutronix.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 04:22:34PM +0100, Sascha Hauer wrote: > + for (i = 0; i < 4; i++) { > + pwrap_writel(wrp, i, PWRAP_SIDLY); > + pwrap_read(wrp, PWRAP_DEW_READ_TEST, &rdata); > + printk("%s: 0x%04x\n", __func__, rdata); Is this really ready for submission, or is this just a hidden oversight? What I tend to do with such debugging is _not_ to indent it at all, which means when the file is reviewed before sending it out (or indeed, when diffing it to review the updates before committing those changes or an amendment to the previous commit) that it sticks out like a sore thumb. -- FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 10.5Mbps down 400kbps up according to speedtest.net.