Hi Christophe,
Christophe Kerello <christophe.kerello@xxxxxx> wrote on Wed, 15 Apr
2020 17:57:31 +0200:
This patch renames functions and local variables to be ready to use
stm32_fmc2 structure.
Signed-off-by: Christophe Kerello <christophe.kerello@xxxxxx>
---
-static int stm32_fmc2_setup_interface(struct nand_chip *chip, int chipnr,
- const struct nand_data_interface *conf)
+static int stm32_fmc2_nfc_setup_interface(struct nand_chip *chip, int chipnr,
+ const struct nand_data_interface *cf)
I suppose you s/conf/cf/ because of the 80 chars boundary. In this case
I don't mind crossing it, I don't think it is better to rename the
conf parameter for this reason.
{
const struct nand_sdr_timings *sdrt;
- sdrt = nand_get_sdr_timings(conf);
+ sdrt = nand_get_sdr_timings(cf);
if (IS_ERR(sdrt))
return PTR_ERR(sdrt);
if (chipnr == NAND_DATA_IFACE_CHECK_ONLY)
return 0;
- stm32_fmc2_calc_timings(chip, sdrt);
- stm32_fmc2_timings_init(chip);
+ stm32_fmc2_nfc_calc_timings(chip, sdrt);
+ stm32_fmc2_nfc_timings_init(chip);
return 0;
}
[...]
-static struct platform_driver stm32_fmc2_driver = {
- .probe = stm32_fmc2_probe,
- .remove = stm32_fmc2_remove,
+static struct platform_driver stm32_fmc2_nfc_driver = {
+ .probe = stm32_fmc2_nfc_probe,
+ .remove = stm32_fmc2_nfc_remove,
.driver = {
- .name = "stm32_fmc2_nand",
- .of_match_table = stm32_fmc2_match,
- .pm = &stm32_fmc2_pm_ops,
+ .name = "stm32_fmc2_nfc",
+ .of_match_table = stm32_fmc2_nfc_match,
+ .pm = &stm32_fmc2_nfc_pm_ops,
},
};
-module_platform_driver(stm32_fmc2_driver);
+module_platform_driver(stm32_fmc2_nfc_driver);
-MODULE_ALIAS("platform:stm32_fmc2_nand");
+MODULE_ALIAS("platform:stm32_fmc2_nfc");
MODULE_AUTHOR("Christophe Kerello <christophe.kerello@xxxxxx>");
-MODULE_DESCRIPTION("STMicroelectronics STM32 FMC2 nand driver");
+MODULE_DESCRIPTION("STMicroelectronics STM32 FMC2 nfc driver");
I would prefer: s/nfc/NFC/ here please.
MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2");
With these two nits,
Reviewed-by: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Thanks,
MiquÃl