On Tue, 2017-01-17 at 01:14 +0200, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
> review comments then, for example it is not obvious that on a platform
> with both CONFIG_ACPI and CONFIG_OF enabled there should be an
> exclusive
> selection of only one of two possible branches as in your code etc.
ACPI and DT app
Hello Luis,
On 01/16/2017 12:32 PM, Luis Oliveira wrote:
> On 12-Jan-17 17:01, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> On Sat, 2017-01-07 at 03:24 +0200, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
>>> On 01/07/2017 02:19 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 1:43 AM, Vladimir Zapolskiy
wrote:
> On 01/
On 12-Jan-17 17:01, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Sat, 2017-01-07 at 03:24 +0200, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
>> On 01/07/2017 02:19 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 1:43 AM, Vladimir Zapolskiy
>>> wrote:
On 01/07/2017 12:45 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>
> + }
On Sat, 2017-01-07 at 03:24 +0200, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
> On 01/07/2017 02:19 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 1:43 AM, Vladimir Zapolskiy
> > wrote:
> > > On 01/07/2017 12:45 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > > + }
> > > > > > + } else if (IS_BUILTIN(CONF
On 01/07/2017 02:19 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 1:43 AM, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
>> On 01/07/2017 12:45 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 11:46 PM, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
> + if (IS_BUILTIN(CONFIG_OF) && dev->of_node) {
IS_BUILTIN
On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 1:43 AM, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
> On 01/07/2017 12:45 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 11:46 PM, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
+ if (IS_BUILTIN(CONFIG_OF) && dev->of_node) {
>>>
>>> IS_BUILTIN(CONFIG_OF) looks excessive, check for non-NULL dev->o
On 01/07/2017 12:45 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 11:46 PM, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
>>> + if (IS_BUILTIN(CONFIG_OF) && dev->of_node) {
>>
>> IS_BUILTIN(CONFIG_OF) looks excessive, check for non-NULL dev->of_node
>> should be sufficient.
>
> Sorry, but you missed the po
On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 11:46 PM, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
>> + if (IS_BUILTIN(CONFIG_OF) && dev->of_node) {
>
> IS_BUILTIN(CONFIG_OF) looks excessive, check for non-NULL dev->of_node
> should be sufficient.
Sorry, but you missed the point.
This will enable compile time optimization and basic
Hello Luis,
On 01/05/2017 07:24 PM, Luis Oliveira wrote:
> This function has the purpose of mode detection by checking the
> device nodes for a reg matching with the I2C_OWN_SLAVE_ADDREESS flag.
> Currently only checks using OF functions (ACPI slave not supported yet).
>
> Signed-off-by: Luis Oli
On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 7:46 PM, Luis Oliveira
wrote:
> On 06-Jan-17 17:17, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 7:15 PM, Luis Oliveira
>> wrote:
>>> On 06-Jan-17 16:29, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 7:24 PM, Luis Oliveira
>>
Please, add kernel doc description
On 06-Jan-17 17:17, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 7:15 PM, Luis Oliveira
> wrote:
>> On 06-Jan-17 16:29, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 7:24 PM, Luis Oliveira
>
>>> Please, add kernel doc description here, important thing is to explain
>>> return codes in Retu
On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 7:15 PM, Luis Oliveira
wrote:
> On 06-Jan-17 16:29, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 7:24 PM, Luis Oliveira
>> Please, add kernel doc description here, important thing is to explain
>> return codes in Return: section of it.
>>
>>> +int i2c_slave_mode_detect(
On 06-Jan-17 16:29, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 7:24 PM, Luis Oliveira
> wrote:
>> This function has the purpose of mode detection by checking the
>> device nodes for a reg matching with the I2C_OWN_SLAVE_ADDREESS flag.
>> Currently only checks using OF functions (ACPI slave no
On 06-Jan-17 16:35, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 11:24 AM, Luis Oliveira
> wrote:
>> This function has the purpose of mode detection by checking the
>> device nodes for a reg matching with the I2C_OWN_SLAVE_ADDREESS flag.
>> Currently only checks using OF functions (ACPI slave not s
On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 11:24 AM, Luis Oliveira
wrote:
> This function has the purpose of mode detection by checking the
> device nodes for a reg matching with the I2C_OWN_SLAVE_ADDREESS flag.
> Currently only checks using OF functions (ACPI slave not supported yet).
>
> Signed-off-by: Luis Oliveir
On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 7:24 PM, Luis Oliveira
wrote:
> This function has the purpose of mode detection by checking the
> device nodes for a reg matching with the I2C_OWN_SLAVE_ADDREESS flag.
> Currently only checks using OF functions (ACPI slave not supported yet).
The code looks good, one import
This function has the purpose of mode detection by checking the
device nodes for a reg matching with the I2C_OWN_SLAVE_ADDREESS flag.
Currently only checks using OF functions (ACPI slave not supported yet).
Signed-off-by: Luis Oliveira
---
Due to the need of checking if the I2C slave address is o
17 matches
Mail list logo
