[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 09/16] mmc: sdhci-xenon: use new match_string() helper/macro

[Dan Carpenter]

On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 09:13:26AM +0000, Ardelean, Alexandru wrote:
> On Wed, 2019-05-08 at 16:26 +0300, Alexandru Ardelean wrote:
> > On Wed, 2019-05-08 at 15:20 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 02:28:35PM +0300, Alexandru Ardelean wrote:
> > > > -static const char * const phy_types[] = {
> > > > -     "emmc 5.0 phy",
> > > > -     "emmc 5.1 phy"
> > > > -};
> > > > -
> > > >  enum xenon_phy_type_enum {
> > > >       EMMC_5_0_PHY,
> > > >       EMMC_5_1_PHY,
> > > >       NR_PHY_TYPES
> > > 
> > > There is no need for NR_PHY_TYPES now so you could remove that as well.
> > > 
> > 
> > I thought the same.
> > The only reason to keep NR_PHY_TYPES, is for potential future patches,
> > where it would be just 1 addition
> > 
> >  enum xenon_phy_type_enum {
> >       EMMC_5_0_PHY,
> >       EMMC_5_1_PHY,
> > +      EMMC_5_2_PHY,
> >       NR_PHY_TYPES
> >   }
> > 
> > Depending on style/preference of how to do enums (allow comma on last
> > enum
> > or not allow comma on last enum value), adding new enum values woudl be 2
> > additions + 1 deletion lines.
> > 
> >  enum xenon_phy_type_enum {
> >       EMMC_5_0_PHY,
> > -      EMMC_5_1_PHY
> > +      EMM
> > C_5_1_PHY,
> > +      EMMC_5_2_PHY
> >  }
> > 
> > Either way (leave NR_PHY_TYPES or remove NR_PHY_TYPES) is fine from my
> > side.
> > 
> 
> Preference on this ?
> If no objection [nobody insists] I would keep.
> 
> I don't feel strongly about it [dropping NR_PHY_TYPES or not].

If you end up resending the series could you remove it, but if not then
it's not worth it.

regards,
dan carpenter