From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751954AbbEGT2H (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 May 2015 15:28:07 -0400 Received: from mezzanine.sirena.org.uk ([106.187.55.193]:55113 "EHLO mezzanine.sirena.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751511AbbEGT2E (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 May 2015 15:28:04 -0400 Date: Thu, 7 May 2015 20:27:58 +0100 From: Mark Brown To: Michael Welling Cc: linux-spi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20150507192758.GR22845@sirena.org.uk> References: <1430955472-11409-1-git-send-email-mwelling@ieee.org> <20150507185831.GQ22845@sirena.org.uk> <20150507192019.GA15112@deathray> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="OR4KrFHJQx98Cazv" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150507192019.GA15112@deathray> X-Cookie: Your present plans will be successful. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 94.175.94.161 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: broonie@sirena.org.uk Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] spi: omap2-mcspi: Add support for GPIO chipselects X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 26 Dec 2011 16:24:06 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mezzanine.sirena.org.uk) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --OR4KrFHJQx98Cazv Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 02:20:19PM -0500, Michael Welling wrote: > On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 07:58:31PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > makes things easier to review and helps people trying to understand the > Do you have any other suggestions or comments on the patch so that I > can incorporate those changes as well in the patch series? No, that's part of the "easier to review" bit. > I noticed a few oddities in the code when converting. > For instance: > http://lxr.free-electrons.com/source/drivers/spi/spi-omap2-mcspi.c#L1225 > What is the point of trying to print tx or rx given the if statement > insures that rx_buff and tx_buff are NULL? I expect it's just a buggy test. --OR4KrFHJQx98Cazv Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJVS7y9AAoJECTWi3JdVIfQpfoH/jBPpwSUVOQ6xxBEFMGGp50r NTBilyLeDBRqJqChW7h0CfXsfHH+Rk5qrCWetTqW3jxXENjaaSX6ScCwrtAEDdz2 Ytz0ek+T4aG2NF8a1oyXd5Tz18bZfwSZrrjzpycFD5Dgyr/J76N2wQfm7+uKeG4b sR56PF14I6nHu+93MuO/ZOBGmA2M1YSbJWIW52ayQOlMKHh2o0ToDfMsKtUr9wWR QgTH98hR/UaoN9pX9zAwjYiro9tfvRj39bLvK3OmWVCbFiYO8pCAgw2tEOcTkd8A 5b5co6EycKO7XxSosu4CKWpGUwqjEBDHonZEfyrgiJYPEV8BfX9O3BSZEbab+zI= =qHQh -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --OR4KrFHJQx98Cazv--