Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 17 Nov 2022 10:13:24 +0100 | From | Uwe Kleine-König <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v6 3/3] hwmon: (max6639) Change from pdata to dt configuration |
| |
On Thu, Nov 17, 2022 at 02:10:45PM +0530, Naresh Solanki wrote: > > > On 17-11-2022 01:15 pm, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > > Hello, > > > > On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 10:36:15PM +0100, Naresh Solanki wrote: > > > max6639_platform_data is not used by any in-kernel driver and does not > > > address the MAX6639 fans separately. > > > Move to device tree configuration with explicit properties to configure > > > each fan. > > > > > > Non-DT platform can still use this module with its default > > > configuration. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Marcello Sylvester Bauer <sylv@sylv.io> > > > Signed-off-by: Naresh Solanki <Naresh.Solanki@9elements.com> > > > > What changed here since v5? Please either add a changelog below the > > tripple-dash for a new revision, or make sure that all relevant people > > get the cover letter. > > > > It seems you didn't address my comments for v5 :-\ > Not sure what I missed but did following changes: > Removed unused header max6639.h > Used dev_err_probe instead, > Removed of_pwm_n_cells, > if condition for freq_table > removed pwm_get_state & instead use pwm->state > division/multiplication optimizations, > indentation of freq_table,
In the cover letter you just wrote:
| Changes in V6: | - Remove unused header file | - minor cleanup
which is too short in my eyes. If you wrote instead:
Address review feedback by Uwe Kleine-König in patch #3, patches #1 and #2 unchanged.
This would be much more helpful as people that were already happy with v5 wouldn't need to look at the first two patches and I would know that you addressed my feedback and would have looked in more detail.
What I miss is the most critical part of my feedback, i.e.: | My overall impression is that this patch mixes too much things. IMHO it | should be split in (at least) | | - Add dt support | - Drop platform support | - Add PWM provider support | - Make use of the PWM API | | maybe also add the 2nd PWM in a separate step.
Best regards Uwe
-- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König | Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ | [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |