Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] rtc: rx6110: add ACPI bindings to I2C
On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 12:52:51PM +0100, Henning Schild wrote:
> Am Tue, 16 Mar 2021 13:30:36 +0200
> schrieb Andy Shevchenko :
>
> > On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 11:08:05AM +0100, Claudius Heine wrote:
> > > From: Johannes Hahn
> > >
> > > This allows the RX6110 driver to be automatically assigned to the
> > > right device on the I2C bus.
> >
> > Thanks for all effort!
> > Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko
> > after addressing the below comments.
> >
> > > Signed-off-by: Johannes Hahn
> > > Signed-off-by: Claudius Heine
> >
> > > Signed-off-by: Henning Schild
>
> Claudius, just remove that. I guess just add yours and mention authors
> in the code if they should receive some recognition.
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
> > > +static const struct acpi_device_id rx6110_i2c_acpi_match[] = {
> > > + { "SECC6110", },
> > > + { },
Missed one thing, remove comma here. Terminator lines do not need a comma (and
it's theoretically may confuse people or scripts while adding a new record to
the array).
> > > +};
> > > +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, rx6110_i2c_acpi_match);
> > > +#endif
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] rtc: rx6110: add ACPI bindings to I2C
Am Tue, 16 Mar 2021 13:30:36 +0200
schrieb Andy Shevchenko :
> On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 11:08:05AM +0100, Claudius Heine wrote:
> > From: Johannes Hahn
> >
> > This allows the RX6110 driver to be automatically assigned to the
> > right device on the I2C bus.
>
> Thanks for all effort!
> Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko
> after addressing the below comments.
>
> > Signed-off-by: Johannes Hahn
> > Signed-off-by: Claudius Heine
>
> > Signed-off-by: Henning Schild
Claudius, just remove that. I guess just add yours and mention authors
in the code if they should receive some recognition.
Henning
> I think this is somehow confusing. Either you need to add
> Co-developed-by of the corresponding people, or remove SoB (because
> of From line), i.o.w seems like Co-dB tag is needed for Johannes or
> you and something should be done with Henning's SoB.
>
> > ---
> > drivers/rtc/rtc-rx6110.c | 12
> > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-rx6110.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-rx6110.c
> > index 79161d4c6ce4..29bd697f82cb 100644
> > --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-rx6110.c
> > +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-rx6110.c
> > @@ -13,6 +13,7 @@
> > #include
> > #include
> > #include
>
> > +#include
>
> Usually it's not needed if you leave IDs always to be compiled.
> Instead mod_devicetable.h is used. But it's all up to you and
> maintainer.
>
> > #include
> > #include
> > #include
> > @@ -447,6 +448,14 @@ static int rx6110_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client
> > *client, return rx6110_probe(rx6110, >dev);
> > }
> >
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
> > +static const struct acpi_device_id rx6110_i2c_acpi_match[] = {
> > + { "SECC6110", },
> > + { },
> > +};
> > +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, rx6110_i2c_acpi_match);
> > +#endif
> > +
> > static const struct i2c_device_id rx6110_i2c_id[] = {
> > { "rx6110", 0 },
> > { }
> > @@ -456,6 +465,9 @@ MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(i2c, rx6110_i2c_id);
> > static struct i2c_driver rx6110_i2c_driver = {
> > .driver = {
> > .name = RX6110_DRIVER_NAME,
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
>
> This is implied by the stub ACPI_PTR() macro for ACPI=n case.
> I.o.w drop this ugly and redundant ifdeffery.
>
> > + .acpi_match_table =
> > ACPI_PTR(rx6110_i2c_acpi_match), +#endif
> > },
> > .probe = rx6110_i2c_probe,
> > .id_table = rx6110_i2c_id,
> > --
> > 2.30.1
> >
>
Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] rtc: rx6110: add ACPI bindings to I2C
On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 01:30:36PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 11:08:05AM +0100, Claudius Heine wrote: > > From: Johannes Hahn > > > > This allows the RX6110 driver to be automatically assigned to the right > > device on the I2C bus. > > Thanks for all effort! > Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko > after addressing the below comments. > > > Signed-off-by: Johannes Hahn > > Signed-off-by: Claudius Heine > > > Signed-off-by: Henning Schild > > I think this is somehow confusing. Either you need to add Co-developed-by of > the corresponding people, or remove SoB (because of From line), i.o.w seems > like Co-dB tag is needed for Johannes or you and something should be done with > Henning's SoB. Since Johannes' name is in the From, then it seems okay for you (either you a co-developer, than a Co-dB tag, or a submitter, than it's okay to have no Co-dB tag). -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] rtc: rx6110: add ACPI bindings to I2C
On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 11:08:05AM +0100, Claudius Heine wrote:
> From: Johannes Hahn
>
> This allows the RX6110 driver to be automatically assigned to the right
> device on the I2C bus.
Thanks for all effort!
Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko
after addressing the below comments.
> Signed-off-by: Johannes Hahn
> Signed-off-by: Claudius Heine
> Signed-off-by: Henning Schild
I think this is somehow confusing. Either you need to add Co-developed-by of
the corresponding people, or remove SoB (because of From line), i.o.w seems
like Co-dB tag is needed for Johannes or you and something should be done with
Henning's SoB.
> ---
> drivers/rtc/rtc-rx6110.c | 12
> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-rx6110.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-rx6110.c
> index 79161d4c6ce4..29bd697f82cb 100644
> --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-rx6110.c
> +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-rx6110.c
> @@ -13,6 +13,7 @@
> #include
> #include
> #include
> +#include
Usually it's not needed if you leave IDs always to be compiled.
Instead mod_devicetable.h is used. But it's all up to you and maintainer.
> #include
> #include
> #include
> @@ -447,6 +448,14 @@ static int rx6110_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
> return rx6110_probe(rx6110, >dev);
> }
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
> +static const struct acpi_device_id rx6110_i2c_acpi_match[] = {
> + { "SECC6110", },
> + { },
> +};
> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, rx6110_i2c_acpi_match);
> +#endif
> +
> static const struct i2c_device_id rx6110_i2c_id[] = {
> { "rx6110", 0 },
> { }
> @@ -456,6 +465,9 @@ MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(i2c, rx6110_i2c_id);
> static struct i2c_driver rx6110_i2c_driver = {
> .driver = {
> .name = RX6110_DRIVER_NAME,
> +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
This is implied by the stub ACPI_PTR() macro for ACPI=n case.
I.o.w drop this ugly and redundant ifdeffery.
> + .acpi_match_table = ACPI_PTR(rx6110_i2c_acpi_match),
> +#endif
> },
> .probe = rx6110_i2c_probe,
> .id_table = rx6110_i2c_id,
> --
> 2.30.1
>
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
