
30 Sep
2017
30 Sep
'17
1:27 a.m.
On 30/09/2017 2:43 AM, "Marek BehĂșn" marek.behun@nic.cz wrote:
On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 10:53:36 +1300 Chris Packham judge.packham@gmail.com wrote:
struct pca954x_priv { @@ -39,14 +40,17 @@ static const struct chip_desc chips[] = { [PCA9544] = { .enable = 0x4, .muxtype = pca954x_ismux,
.width = 4, }, [PCA9547] = { .enable = 0x8, .muxtype = pca954x_ismux,
.width = 8, }, [PCA9548] = { .enable = 0x8, .muxtype = pca954x_isswi,
.width = 8, },
};
Hmm, looking at this now, isn't one of the enable or width fields redundant? They both have same values in all entries.
They happen to have the same value but they have different meanings. In fact enable isn't actually used for the isswi code path.