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=-3.0 required=3.0 tests=MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_NEOMUTT autolearn=ham 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 05152C433F5 for ; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 16:57:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A54662087F for ; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 16:57:32 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org A54662087F Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728643AbeIJVwa (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Sep 2018 17:52:30 -0400 Received: from mail-ed1-f68.google.com ([209.85.208.68]:36803 "EHLO mail-ed1-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727989AbeIJVw3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Sep 2018 17:52:29 -0400 Received: by mail-ed1-f68.google.com with SMTP id f4-v6so17072723edq.3; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 09:57:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=B/c4yY5yML7+QhxA/6VTMuArnLdEas4APK+tCOdD6Co=; b=nLFN2D6HGriLIkqdeaVo3B31gOXPjEM9zBHxaXzH5vOQklgaaMqSvuXMUNbeBXjUJI xC7cz4sSaMHedVxe6ACWcVdwKDbDKq58dtsebA7LtKIL6QbwzTtQ+OovWAdreYpUZ27a ZHwKlFZ40Yx40FME6Q8CdJ0N9+q1TmjeC+FlPNxJdNYAubagIrFrwPvlqRRqgRb54Lvp z6TBrU4C2LJDsRFCwrOAnv+udfw7WQfbJNxTEl9gV3WLVCvqBEnLYcBmpYYJw6XFfj7P BoH2OLwTdmwKIEflwoXlK68EC0fZhyv1JM8Cs7OX7iR3GBMFxrcx/x8eS//fM9vMesC/ 9Nrw== X-Gm-Message-State: APzg51ADaMSbqQzgDi87QWW71O+I5Ad06rsfURMlRsMZflarJvUf2swm XHy54sjCTqD0r6fHJ1jKVse9nuDg X-Google-Smtp-Source: ANB0VdZUdt5xJxYLxw1gJqav6JxMmQuiYzH6ZvhluJrFIk4/rUKs2+M+toRlundnr1b/XssR9Rk6OQ== X-Received: by 2002:a50:9a02:: with SMTP id o2-v6mr23991996edb.236.1536598648706; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 09:57:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kozik-lap (xdsl-188-155-58-14.adslplus.ch. [188.155.58.14]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id d23-v6sm3324897eds.47.2018.09.10.09.57.27 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Mon, 10 Sep 2018 09:57:27 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2018 18:57:26 +0200 From: Krzysztof Kozlowski To: Cedric Roux Cc: kgene@kernel.org, linux@armlinux.org.uk, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, "linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] ARM: s3c24xx: Correct SD card write protect detection on Mini2440 Message-ID: <20180910165726.5vl24ng2dywexzsf@kozik-lap> References: <20180907215446.15160-1-sed@free.fr> <20180907215446.15160-2-sed@free.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170609 (1.8.3) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 06:55:09PM +0200, Cedric Roux wrote: > On 09/10/2018 12:23 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >> static struct s3c24xx_mci_pdata mini2440_mmc_cfg __initdata = { > >> - .gpio_detect = S3C2410_GPG(8), > >> - .gpio_wprotect = S3C2410_GPH(8), > >> - .set_power = NULL, > >> - .ocr_avail = MMC_VDD_32_33|MMC_VDD_33_34, > >> + .gpio_detect = S3C2410_GPG(8), > >> + .gpio_wprotect = S3C2410_GPH(8), > >> + .wprotect_invert = 1, > >> + .set_power = NULL, > >> + .ocr_avail = MMC_VDD_32_33|MMC_VDD_33_34, > > > > This looks unexpected... after patch 1 there should be only one change > > - one new line added. What happened here? > > This is to align all the '='. > > These were spaces before the '=' so I also used spaces. > Should I put TABs instead? I looked in the coding style > and didn't find anything about this specific thing > (maybe I read too fast though). > > And if this ends up unaligned because 'wprotect_invert' > requires a second TAB for the others, should I do a separate > commit? Ah, I understand. It's okay, thanks! Best regards, Krzysztof