Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] iio: mxs-lradc: add scale attribute to channels

[Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>]

Hi Hector,

> Hi Marek,
> 
> On 07/22/2013 09:42 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > Dear Hector Palacios,
> > 
> >> Hi Marek,
> >> 
> >> On 07/19/2013 06:14 PM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >>> Dear Hector Palacios,
> >>> 
> >>>> Dear Marek,
> >>>> 
> >>>> On 07/19/2013 04:30 PM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >>>>>> @@ -228,39 +230,12 @@ struct mxs_lradc {
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>>     #define LRADC_RESOLUTION			12
> >>>>>>     #define LRADC_SINGLE_SAMPLE_MASK		((1 << LRADC_RESOLUTION)
> > 
> > - 1)
> > 
> >>>>>> -/*
> >>>>>> - * Raw I/O operations
> >>>>>> - */
> >>>>>> -static int mxs_lradc_read_raw(struct iio_dev *iio_dev,
> >>>>>> +static int mxs_lradc_read_single(struct iio_dev *iio_dev,
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>>     			const struct iio_chan_spec *chan,
> >>>>>>     			int *val, int *val2, long m)
> >>>>>>     
> >>>>>>     {
> >>>>>>     
> >>>>>>     	struct mxs_lradc *lradc = iio_priv(iio_dev);
> >>>>>>     	int ret;
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> -	unsigned long mask;
> >>>>>> -
> >>>>>> -	if (m != IIO_CHAN_INFO_RAW)
> >>>>>> -		return -EINVAL;
> >>>>>> -
> >>>>>> -	/* Check for invalid channel */
> >>>>>> -	if (chan->channel > LRADC_MAX_TOTAL_CHANS)
> >>>>>> -		return -EINVAL;
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> This was already resolved, so this patch won't apply I'm afraid.
> >>>> 
> >>>> You mean the 'unsigned long mask', right?  Yeah, I think I had
> >>>> resolved that one before submitting, but looks like I didn't.
> >>>> The other check is not resolved afaik. We agreed to remove it, but on
> >>>> a different patch.
> >>> 
> >>> I mean the other check, yeah. A patch removing that should be applied
> >>> already.
> >> 
> >> Where exactly? It's not fixed in Jonathan's fixes-togreg branch, at
> >> least. Did you fixed it?
> > 
> > I use linux-next [1], should be it.
> > 
> > http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-
> > next.git/log/drivers/staging/iio/adc/mxs-lradc.c
> 
> That is removing the unsigned long mask, but not the check for invalid
> channel. I'm taking care of the unsigned long mask but an additional patch
> is needed to remove the check for invalid channel.

Sorry for the confusion.

Best regards,
Marek Vasut