Messages in this thread | | | From | Felipe Balbi <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/3] platform: surface: Add surface xbl | Date | Fri, 29 Oct 2021 07:45:28 +0300 |
| |
Hi,
Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> writes: > diff --git a/drivers/platform/surface/surface-xbl.c b/drivers/platform/surface/surface-xbl.c > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..910287f0c987 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/drivers/platform/surface/surface-xbl.c > @@ -0,0 +1,223 @@ > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only > +/* > + * surface-xbl.c - Surface E(x)tensible (B)oot(l)oader > + * > > First of all, do not include filename in the file. > > Capital L will be better to read and understand the > abbreviation. Actually usually we do something like this: > > Extensible Boot Loader (EBL)
nah, this is silly Andy. It's just capitalized as eXtensible Boot Loader, very much akin to eXtensible Host Controller Interface.
> +static const struct attribute_group inputs_attr_group = { > + .attrs = inputs_attrs, > +}; > + > +static u8 surface_xbl_readb(void __iomem *base, u32 offset) > +{ > + return readb(base + offset); > +} > + > +static u16 surface_xbl_readw(void __iomem *base, u32 offset) > +{ > + return readw(base + offset); > +} > > Either use corresponding io accessors in-line, or make first parameter > to be sirface_xbl pointer. Otherwise these helpers useless.
I agree with passing surface_xbl point as first parameter, but calling the accessors pointless is a bit much. At a minimum, they make it easier to ftrace the entire driver by simply ftracing surface_xbl_*
-- balbi
| |