RE: [NEW DRIVER V4 7/7] DA9058 REGULATOR driver

[Opensource [Anthony Olech]]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Guenter Roeck [mailto:linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: 16 April 2013 14:36
> To: Opensource [Anthony Olech]
> Cc: LKML
> Subject: Re: [NEW DRIVER V4 7/7] DA9058 REGULATOR driver
> 
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 09:17:27AM +0000, Opensource [Anthony Olech]
> wrote:
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Guenter Roeck [mailto:linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > > Sent: 15 April 2013 18:46
> > > To: Opensource [Anthony Olech]
> > > Cc: LKML
> > > Subject: Re: [NEW DRIVER V4 7/7] DA9058 REGULATOR driver
> > >
> > > On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 05:29:13PM +0000, Opensource [Anthony Olech]
> > > wrote:
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Guenter Roeck [mailto:linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > > > > Sent: 15 April 2013 17:36
> > > > > To: Opensource [Anthony Olech]
> > > > > Cc: LKML
> > > > > Subject: Re: [NEW DRIVER V4 7/7] DA9058 REGULATOR driver
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 03:00:58PM +0000, Opensource [Anthony
> > > > > Olech]
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > From: Guenter Roeck [mailto:linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > > > > > > Sent: 12 April 2013 14:32
> > > > > > > To: Opensource [Anthony Olech]
> > > > > > > Cc: Mark Brown; Liam Girdwood; Jean Delvare; Randy Dunlap;
> > > > > > > LKML; David Dajun Chen
> > > > > > > Subject: Re: [NEW DRIVER V4 7/7] DA9058 REGULATOR driver
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 02:05:28PM +0100, Anthony Olech wrote:
> > > > > > > > This is the REGULATOR component driver of the Dialog DA9058
> PMIC.
> > > > > > > > This driver is just one component of the whole DA9058 PMIC
> driver.
> > > > > > > > It depends on the CORE component driver of the DA9058 MFD.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > There are 6 warnings from scripts/checkpatch.pl, but since
> > > > > > > > it seems to be complaining about variable names such as
> > > > > > > > min_uV are in CamelCase, when it is obvious that they are
> > > > > > > > not in CamelCase I have
> > > > > ignored them.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ??? min_uV _is_ CamelCase ???
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Ok, maybe it is camelcasE, but you are splitting hairs here.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > it is not me splitting hairs, it is scripts/checkpatch.pl
> > > > > >
> > > > > Maybe you did not understand what I meant. Per your logic,
> > > > >
> > > > > 	MicroVolt is CamelCase
> > > > > 	uVolt is ???
> > > > > 	uV is not CamelCase
> > > > >
> > > > > By abbreviating CamelCase to camelCase to cC you make it, in
> > > > > your opinion, acceptable.
> > > > >
> > > > > If you want to declare CamelCase variables, just do it, but
> > > > > don't claim that they are not really CamelCase.
> > > > >
> > > > > Guenter
> > > >
> > > > I always thought that camel case meant "changing from lower case
> > > > to upper case the first letter of each word and then joining the
> > > > capitalized words together", so by that definition uV or mW are
> > > > not camel
> > > case because "v" and "w" are not words!
> >
> > The definition of CamelCase From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia is:
> >
> > "CamelCase (camel case) is a term which refers to the practice of
> > writing compound words where the first letter of an identifier is
> > lowercase and the first letter of each subsequent concatenated word is
> capitalized."
> >
> Maybe the rule should read "don't mix lowercase and uppercase letters in
> variable names and defines" to prevent variable names such as cAmelcAse or
> cameLcasE, which would be permitted with your logic :).

It is really good to have a definition that anyone can work with!
 
> > > > Either way it seems that the algorithm in scripts/checkpatch.pl is
> > > > wrong! and
> > > that was my point.
> > >
> > > Guess we'll have to agree to disagree here, as I happen to think
> > > that checkpatch is perfectly right.
> > > Guenter
> >
> > Hi Guenter,
> >
> > I am quite happy to accept the algorithm in scripts/checkpatch.pl as
> > the arbiter for correctly formed linux kernel variable names.
> >
> > On that basis "old_mV", "new_uA" etc are incorrectly formed variable names.
> > Could you possibly suggest legal alternatives to "mA", "uV", "kW" ??
> >
> I just changed it to lowercase in the ntc_thermistor driver. What you use is
> really your call as long as it does not mix uppercase and lowercase letters.
> 
> Guenter

many thanks, I will do the same.

Tony Olech

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/