lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Dec]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v4 5/5] i2c: designware: Cleaning comments and formatation
From
Date
On 12/07/2016 07:55 PM, Luis Oliveira wrote:
> - Missspelling, comment formatation and fix a string of
> the existing code
>
> Signed-off-by: Luis Oliveira <lolivei@synopsys.com>
> ---
> Changes V3->V4: (Andy Shevchenko)
> - created a commit message
>
> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-common.c | 2 +-
> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-slave.c | 10 ++++++----
> 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-common.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-common.c
> index 41b38d8b8732..838ef662d2c8 100644
> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-common.c
> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-common.c
> @@ -42,7 +42,7 @@ static char *abort_sources[] = {
> [ABRT_TXDATA_NOACK] =
> "data not acknowledged",
> [ABRT_GCALL_NOACK] =
> - "no acknowledgement for a general call",
> + "no acknowledgment for a general call",

I'm not a native speaker but are both acknowledgement and acknowledgment
ok? I.e. is there need to change?

> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-slave.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-slave.c
> index 1c7f82bb2513..442bc5ce6d47 100644
> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-slave.c
> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-slave.c
> @@ -70,8 +70,8 @@ int i2c_dw_init_slave(struct dw_i2c_dev *dev)
> /* Configure register access mode 16bit */
> dev->accessor_flags |= ACCESS_16BIT;
> } else if (reg != DW_IC_COMP_TYPE_VALUE) {
> - dev_err(dev->dev, "Unknown Synopsys component type: "
> - "0x%08x\n", reg);
> + dev_err(dev->dev,
> + "Unknown Synopsys component type: 0x%08x\n", reg);
> i2c_dw_release_lock(dev);
> return -ENODEV;
> }
> @@ -181,8 +181,10 @@ int i2c_dw_reg_slave(struct i2c_client *slave)
> return -EBUSY;
> if (slave->flags & I2C_CLIENT_TEN)
> return -EAFNOSUPPORT;
> - /* set slave address in the IC_SAR register,
> - * the address to which the DW_apb_i2c responds */
> + /*
> + * set slave address in the IC_SAR register,
> + * the address to which the DW_apb_i2c responds
> + */

These two should be done already in the patch 4/5 since it introduced
the lines that you are changing here.

--
Jarkko

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-12-13 16:09    [W:0.206 / U:0.148 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site