Subject: [PATCH v7 3/9] nvmem: Add nvmem_device based consumer apis.

From: [email-masked] (Srinivas Kandagatla)
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 09:21:19 +0100

Thanks Stephen,

On 14/07/15 23:06, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> On 07/10, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote:
>> +static int devm_nvmem_device_match(struct device *dev, void *res, void *data)
>> +{
>> +	struct nvmem_device **nvmem = res;
>> +
>> +	if (!nvmem || !*nvmem) {
>> +		WARN_ON(!nvmem || !*nvmem);
>
> This could be
>
> 	if (WARN_ON(!nvmem || !*nvmem))
>
Yep, will fix it.
>> +		return 0;
>> +	}
>> +	return *nvmem == data;
>> +}
>> +
>> [..]
>> +
>> +/**
>> + * nvmem_device_write() - Write cell to a given nvmem device
>> + *
>> + * @nvmem: nvmem device to be written to.
>> + * @offset: offset in nvmem device.
>> + * @bytes: number of bytes to write.
>> + * @buf: buffer to be written.
>> + *
>> + * The return value will be an length of bytes written or non zero on failure.
>
> Should say negative value instead of non-zero? Length is
> non-zero already.
>
> General nitpick comment: Kernel-doc allows for a standard return
> syntax.
Ok, I will fix such instances.
>
> 	Return: length of bytes written or negative value on failure.
>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/nvmem-provider.h b/include/linux/nvmem-provider.h
>> index f589d3b..74eed42 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/nvmem-provider.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/nvmem-provider.h
>> @@ -12,15 +12,9 @@
>>   #ifndef _LINUX_NVMEM_PROVIDER_H
>>   #define _LINUX_NVMEM_PROVIDER_H
>>
>> -struct nvmem_device;
>> +#include <linux/nvmem-consumer.h>
>>
>> -struct nvmem_cell_info {
>> -	const char		*name;
>> -	int			offset;
>> -	int			bytes;
>> -	int			bit_offset;
>> -	int			nbits;
>> -};
>
> Why does this move from provider to consumer? Can't we do put
> this struct in the right place from the beginning?
>
  I will take care of it in next version.

--srini
>> +struct nvmem_device;