On 07/10, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote:
> +static int devm_nvmem_device_match(struct device *dev, void *res, void *data)
> +{
> + struct nvmem_device **nvmem = res;
> +
> + if (!nvmem || !*nvmem) {
> + WARN_ON(!nvmem || !*nvmem);
This could be
if (WARN_ON(!nvmem || !*nvmem))
> + return 0;
> + }
> + return *nvmem == data;
> +}
> +
> [..]
> +
> +/**
> + * nvmem_device_write() - Write cell to a given nvmem device
> + *
> + * @nvmem: nvmem device to be written to.
> + * @offset: offset in nvmem device.
> + * @bytes: number of bytes to write.
> + * @buf: buffer to be written.
> + *
> + * The return value will be an length of bytes written or non zero on
> failure.
Should say negative value instead of non-zero? Length is
non-zero already.
General nitpick comment: Kernel-doc allows for a standard return
syntax.
Return: length of bytes written or negative value on failure.
> diff --git a/include/linux/nvmem-provider.h b/include/linux/nvmem-provider.h
> index f589d3b..74eed42 100644
> --- a/include/linux/nvmem-provider.h
> +++ b/include/linux/nvmem-provider.h
> @@ -12,15 +12,9 @@
> #ifndef _LINUX_NVMEM_PROVIDER_H
> #define _LINUX_NVMEM_PROVIDER_H
>
> -struct nvmem_device;
> +#include <linux/nvmem-consumer.h>
>
> -struct nvmem_cell_info {
> - const char *name;
> - int offset;
> - int bytes;
> - int bit_offset;
> - int nbits;
> -};
Why does this move from provider to consumer? Can't we do put
this struct in the right place from the beginning?
> +struct nvmem_device;
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
