Messages in this thread | | | From | Steven King <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] hwmon: driver for TI tmp102 temperature sensor | Date | Thu, 4 Feb 2010 13:17:37 -0800 |
| |
On Thursday 04 February 2010 10:22:03 Andrew Morton wrote: > On Wed, 3 Feb 2010 17:23:49 -0800 > > Steven King <sfking@fdwdc.com> wrote: > > The TI TMP102 is similar to the lm75. It differs from the lm75 by having > > a 16 bit conf register and the temp registers have a minimum resolution > > of 12bits; the extended conf register can select 13 bit resolution (which > > this driver does) and also change the update rate (which this driver > > currently doesn't use). > > A neat little driver.
Thanks.
> checkpatch spits this warning: > > WARNING: struct dev_pm_ops should normally be const > #387: FILE: drivers/hwmon/tmp102.c:300: > +static struct dev_pm_ops tmp102_dev_pm_ops = { > > which seems truthful enough.
Indeed. I am, however, somewhat surprised since I ran the patch thru checkpatch before posting it and no errors or warnings were reported. Is there a version of checkpatch other than the one included in the tree that I should be using?
> > And doing this will hurt readers' brains less: > > > > Use conventional array-walk loop.
Ah yes, an idiosyncrasy of mine in preferring do while over for loops especially when I 'know' the initial test will pass. Whatever is the preferred idiom for the kernel is fine with me.
-- Steven King -- sfking at fdwdc dot com
| |