Wolfram Sang wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 06:07:45PM +0200, Darius wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> (I know I am myself quite new here. I don't want to boast, just trying
> to be a little bit helpful.)
>
> I found some things concerning the formal side:
>
>> + * History: 2002/2/07 use msgs[]
> I have been told here that histories are not wanted as they are achieved
> through git.
ok, I'll remove history.
>
>> +static struct platform_driver i2c_imx_driver = {
>> + .probe = i2c_imx_probe,
>> + .remove = i2c_imx_remove,
>> + .driver = {
>> + .name = DRIVER_NAME,
>> + .owner = THIS_MODULE,
> Indentation seems wrong here and in some other places...
stupid thing. It seems it's caused by Code::Blocks editor. I will
correct text with simple text editor.
>
>> +struct imx_i2c_struct {
>> + struct i2c_adapter adapter;
>> + struct resource *res;
>> + void __iomem *base;
> ...like here and so on.
>
>> + #ifdef CONFIG_I2C_DEBUG_BUS
>> + printk("I2C: <i2c_imx_bus_busy>\n");
>> + #endif
> Maybe you can define a debug-printing-macro that only prints when
> DEBUG_BUS is set and is simply empty when it is unset? This should make
> the code more readable, I think (or use pr_debug).
>
>> + // chech or i2c bus is not busy
> CodingStyle suggests not using //.
this is from old driver code... I'll change it to /* */
>
> All the best,
>
> Wolfram
>
thanks for comments. What I should do with corrected patch? Place there
again?
BR,
Darius
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> i2c mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/i2c
_______________________________________________
i2c mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/i2c
