On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 1:31 PM Lukas Bulwahn <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Sat, Dec 12, 2020 at 8:56 PM Dwaipayan Ray <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Instead of open coding DEVICE_ATTR() defines, use the > > DEVICE_ATTR_RW(), DEVICE_ATTR_WO(), and DEVICE_ATTR_RO() > > macros intead. > > typo: s/intead/instead/ > > No need to use the word "instead" twice in one sentence, though, we got it :) > > > > > This required a few functions to be renamed, but the functionality > > itself is unchanged. > > > > Note that this is compile tested only. > > > > This note does not go in the commit message. In the future, this will > be simply not true anymore, but this below the "---" (see HERE! as > marker). > > For testing, you can generate the objdump of the binary before and > after and compare if that is as expected. > > Other than that, the change itself looks good to me, so: > > Reviewed-by: Lukas Bulwahn <[email protected]> > > Thanks, Dwaipayan, for fixing this up. > > Will you also add a checkpatch rule to identify other DEVICE_ATTR(...) > that can be adjusted to the refined macros, so that checkpatch informs > other submitters as well? >
I think a checkpatch rule for this already exists. But it cannot automatically rename the function names. That might be the only drawback we got. Probably clang-format could fix these automatically. > > Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]> > > Cc: Dan Murphy <[email protected]> > > Cc: Pavel Machek <[email protected]> > > Cc: Lukas Bulwahn <[email protected]> > > Cc: [email protected] > > Cc: [email protected] > > Cc: [email protected] > > As far as I know, the maintainers will add the Cc lines---if they like > those---with script support. > I thought I might ease the work of maintainers to add those lines :( But nevertheless I will remove them. > > Signed-off-by: Dwaipayan Ray <[email protected]> > > --- > > HERE! > Thanks Lukas. I will be sending in a v2 if the led maintainers have no problem with this patch. Thank you, Dwaipayan.
