| Message ID | 20240826161850.74447-1-krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | gpio: kerneldoc fixes for excess members | expand |
On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 06:18:50PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > Drop kerneldoc descriptions of struct members which do not exist to fix > W=1 warnings: > > drivers/gpio/gpio-pch.c:101: warning: Excess struct member 'lock' description in 'pch_gpio' > drivers/gpio/gpio-syscon.c:46: warning: Excess struct member 'compatible' description in 'syscon_gpio_data' I prefer on per-driver basis, but since it's simple and I have nothing in my queue, Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andy@kernel.org> # for gpio-pch in the assumption that Bart takes it directly.
On 26/08/2024 19:25, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 06:18:50PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> Drop kerneldoc descriptions of struct members which do not exist to fix >> W=1 warnings: >> >> drivers/gpio/gpio-pch.c:101: warning: Excess struct member 'lock' description in 'pch_gpio' >> drivers/gpio/gpio-syscon.c:46: warning: Excess struct member 'compatible' description in 'syscon_gpio_data' > > I prefer on per-driver basis, but since it's simple and I have nothing > in my queue, These are so trivial without impact on the code, even if W=1 reports them, that it would be quite a churn to handle multiple patches. Best regards, Krzysztof
On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 4:55 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > On 26/08/2024 19:25, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 06:18:50PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >> Drop kerneldoc descriptions of struct members which do not exist to fix > >> W=1 warnings: > >> > >> drivers/gpio/gpio-pch.c:101: warning: Excess struct member 'lock' description in 'pch_gpio' > >> drivers/gpio/gpio-syscon.c:46: warning: Excess struct member 'compatible' description in 'syscon_gpio_data' > > > > I prefer on per-driver basis, but since it's simple and I have nothing > > in my queue, > > These are so trivial without impact on the code, even if W=1 reports > them, that it would be quite a churn to handle multiple patches. Even trivial changes may lead to Git conflicts if managed separately. But as I said, there is nothing in my queue (at all) so there are no chances for conflicts.
On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 4:02 PM Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 4:55 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski > <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > > On 26/08/2024 19:25, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 06:18:50PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > > >> Drop kerneldoc descriptions of struct members which do not exist to fix > > >> W=1 warnings: > > >> > > >> drivers/gpio/gpio-pch.c:101: warning: Excess struct member 'lock' description in 'pch_gpio' > > >> drivers/gpio/gpio-syscon.c:46: warning: Excess struct member 'compatible' description in 'syscon_gpio_data' > > > > > > I prefer on per-driver basis, but since it's simple and I have nothing > > > in my queue, > > > > These are so trivial without impact on the code, even if W=1 reports > > them, that it would be quite a churn to handle multiple patches. > > Even trivial changes may lead to Git conflicts if managed separately. > But as I said, there is nothing in my queue (at all) so there are no > chances for conflicts. > Is this an Ack for me to take these or do you want them to go through your tree? Bart
On Mon, Sep 2, 2024 at 1:09 PM Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 4:02 PM Andy Shevchenko > <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 4:55 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski > > <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > > > On 26/08/2024 19:25, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > > On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 06:18:50PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > > > > >> Drop kerneldoc descriptions of struct members which do not exist to fix > > > >> W=1 warnings: > > > >> > > > >> drivers/gpio/gpio-pch.c:101: warning: Excess struct member 'lock' description in 'pch_gpio' > > > >> drivers/gpio/gpio-syscon.c:46: warning: Excess struct member 'compatible' description in 'syscon_gpio_data' > > > > > > > > I prefer on per-driver basis, but since it's simple and I have nothing > > > > in my queue, > > > > > > These are so trivial without impact on the code, even if W=1 reports > > > them, that it would be quite a churn to handle multiple patches. > > > > Even trivial changes may lead to Git conflicts if managed separately. > > But as I said, there is nothing in my queue (at all) so there are no > > chances for conflicts. > > Is this an Ack for me to take these or do you want them to go through your tree? I was under the impression that I had sent the Rb tag (there was an explanation about my preferences which do not prevent this from being applied). Should I resent it? (Yes, I have checked and it's there, `b4` should catch that.)
On Mon, Sep 2, 2024 at 12:38 PM Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 2, 2024 at 1:09 PM Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl> wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 4:02 PM Andy Shevchenko > > <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 4:55 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski > > > <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > On 26/08/2024 19:25, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 06:18:50PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > > > > > > >> Drop kerneldoc descriptions of struct members which do not exist to fix > > > > >> W=1 warnings: > > > > >> > > > > >> drivers/gpio/gpio-pch.c:101: warning: Excess struct member 'lock' description in 'pch_gpio' > > > > >> drivers/gpio/gpio-syscon.c:46: warning: Excess struct member 'compatible' description in 'syscon_gpio_data' > > > > > > > > > > I prefer on per-driver basis, but since it's simple and I have nothing > > > > > in my queue, > > > > > > > > These are so trivial without impact on the code, even if W=1 reports > > > > them, that it would be quite a churn to handle multiple patches. > > > > > > Even trivial changes may lead to Git conflicts if managed separately. > > > But as I said, there is nothing in my queue (at all) so there are no > > > chances for conflicts. > > > > Is this an Ack for me to take these or do you want them to go through your tree? > > I was under the impression that I had sent the Rb tag (there was an > explanation about my preferences which do not prevent this from being > applied). Should I resent it? (Yes, I have checked and it's there, > `b4` should catch that.) > I don't have this message for some reason. :( Bart
On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 6:18 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > > Drop kerneldoc descriptions of struct members which do not exist to fix > W=1 warnings: > > drivers/gpio/gpio-pch.c:101: warning: Excess struct member 'lock' description in 'pch_gpio' > drivers/gpio/gpio-syscon.c:46: warning: Excess struct member 'compatible' description in 'syscon_gpio_data' > > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> > --- I have a different patch in my queue that addresses the syscon warning already. Can you resend just the pch part? Bart
On 02/09/2024 14:03, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 6:18 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski > <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: >> >> Drop kerneldoc descriptions of struct members which do not exist to fix >> W=1 warnings: >> >> drivers/gpio/gpio-pch.c:101: warning: Excess struct member 'lock' description in 'pch_gpio' >> drivers/gpio/gpio-syscon.c:46: warning: Excess struct member 'compatible' description in 'syscon_gpio_data' >> >> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> >> --- > > I have a different patch in my queue that addresses the syscon warning > already. Can you resend just the pch part? ack Best regards, Krzysztof
On 02/09/2024 14:03, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 6:18 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski > <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: >> >> Drop kerneldoc descriptions of struct members which do not exist to fix >> W=1 warnings: >> >> drivers/gpio/gpio-pch.c:101: warning: Excess struct member 'lock' description in 'pch_gpio' >> drivers/gpio/gpio-syscon.c:46: warning: Excess struct member 'compatible' description in 'syscon_gpio_data' >> >> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> >> --- > > I have a different patch in my queue that addresses the syscon warning > already. Can you resend just the pch part? Heh, you just picked up something which was sent week after mine. :/ Best regards, Krzysztof
On Mon, Sep 02, 2024 at 02:10:37PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 02/09/2024 14:03, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 6:18 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski ... > > I have a different patch in my queue that addresses the syscon warning > > already. Can you resend just the pch part? > > Heh, you just picked up something which was sent week after mine. :/ Whatever you decided, guys, feel free to use my Rb tag for gpio-pch. Thank you!
On Mon, Sep 2, 2024 at 2:10 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > > On 02/09/2024 14:03, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 6:18 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski > > <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > >> > >> Drop kerneldoc descriptions of struct members which do not exist to fix > >> W=1 warnings: > >> > >> drivers/gpio/gpio-pch.c:101: warning: Excess struct member 'lock' description in 'pch_gpio' > >> drivers/gpio/gpio-syscon.c:46: warning: Excess struct member 'compatible' description in 'syscon_gpio_data' > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> > >> --- > > > > I have a different patch in my queue that addresses the syscon warning > > already. Can you resend just the pch part? > > Heh, you just picked up something which was sent week after mine. :/ > > Best regards, > Krzysztof > Sorry, I got back from vacation and was just going through the inbox in no particular order. If you really insist, I can back the other one out but I'd prefer to not rebase if I don't have to. Bart
diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-pch.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-pch.c index ee37ecb615cb..63f25c72eac2 100644 --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-pch.c +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-pch.c @@ -84,7 +84,6 @@ struct pch_gpio_reg_data { * @gpio: Data for GPIO infrastructure. * @pch_gpio_reg: Memory mapped Register data is saved here * when suspend. - * @lock: Used for register access protection * @irq_base: Save base of IRQ number for interrupt * @ioh: IOH ID * @spinlock: Used for register access protection diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-syscon.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-syscon.c index 3a90a3a1caea..5ab394ec81e6 100644 --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-syscon.c +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-syscon.c @@ -23,7 +23,6 @@ /** * struct syscon_gpio_data - Configuration for the device. - * @compatible: SYSCON driver compatible string. * @flags: Set of GPIO_SYSCON_FEAT_ flags: * GPIO_SYSCON_FEAT_IN: GPIOs supports input, * GPIO_SYSCON_FEAT_OUT: GPIOs supports output,
Drop kerneldoc descriptions of struct members which do not exist to fix W=1 warnings: drivers/gpio/gpio-pch.c:101: warning: Excess struct member 'lock' description in 'pch_gpio' drivers/gpio/gpio-syscon.c:46: warning: Excess struct member 'compatible' description in 'syscon_gpio_data' Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> --- drivers/gpio/gpio-pch.c | 1 - drivers/gpio/gpio-syscon.c | 1 - 2 files changed, 2 deletions(-)