From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DA7A51DA614; Tue, 26 Nov 2024 18:49:10 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1732646951; cv=none; b=i0y9q4WSpLVfwKuBdoBugc5Ct0qMlsOF/u13gghdnFlCQKNlV7FR/xJ/Pc8cXsv2kvlEnFgLFQb5fMlWkOLgTh3MgctpbdB7g334DIc9vvgrBmuYNDY2zL5P/CYT0YCZvBOpCjQxFRcKppxFJWLe29El3Nrl1+nUzADMAWXKvc8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1732646951; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ZtPBQKk9PTIaQVnyuOg00v4/13J+GN9z4uCbr3BSDLk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=ViQqrweU1ovQ5u4jT9ip9Yw8cYNbMkJy/S3i1EC9tg0iLmpBVb9d+41V9X6KyYSde4R171PKfZ//vxCBMqyPMghRrejCNlDnaO/QceM8BdK0/Q432qCHp/emHZFHKMtNVISeIzPpbrhkxyEkTgS9Uh3kBOHBHzKrxb4RtxO5uEY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=USzxeqaw; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="USzxeqaw" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8F052C4CECF; Tue, 26 Nov 2024 18:48:56 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1732646950; bh=ZtPBQKk9PTIaQVnyuOg00v4/13J+GN9z4uCbr3BSDLk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=USzxeqawwweQQpD6/JeQidpKFv1Ak3/4gfblR6RxC4U+bNzehg9+w25aYHO3e++3o WubSQSAjyeHDqSYkOT6kWOgAkzNa4sssSiADArS/1Kj5wRce8sg62iv/WnsAR/ACAa iVBmyuivVGoyytlIC6YUSOU3Vp3uSr9CvF8Y/RKkyYUWrfCv0hH0NfxSZZWCDWxlHe qvh7RCOJdQKprj/mUzIR08OC1UbzrBbg8j1uvswKJai03gknl1vBtOOtlj1W/jdwG2 wk0PZODUd6Xyjof7OIObFBrHuESDlkixWCmdCgZd7jF+CePA8zFS9CwToQ5DLlR0SK Hs/ya/BAtEilA== Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2024 18:48:51 +0000 From: Jonathan Cameron To: Guillaume Stols Cc: Lars-Peter Clausen , Michael Hennerich , Nuno Sa , Rob Herring , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Conor Dooley , Jonathan Cameron , linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, dlechner@baylibre.com, jstephan@baylibre.com, aardelean@baylibre.com, adureghello@baylibre.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/9] iio: adc: ad7606: Add support for writing registers when using backend Message-ID: <20241126184851.5d28793e@jic23-huawei> In-Reply-To: <20241121-ad7606_add_iio_backend_software_mode-v1-9-8a693a5e3fa9@baylibre.com> References: <20241121-ad7606_add_iio_backend_software_mode-v1-0-8a693a5e3fa9@baylibre.com> <20241121-ad7606_add_iio_backend_software_mode-v1-9-8a693a5e3fa9@baylibre.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.3.0 (GTK 3.24.43; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, 21 Nov 2024 10:18:31 +0000 Guillaume Stols wrote: > Adds the logic for effectively enabling the software mode for the > iio-backend, i.e enabling the software mode channel configuration and > implementing the register writing functions. > > Signed-off-by: Guillaume Stols A few comments inline, but basically looks fine to me. Thanks, Jonathan > diff --git a/drivers/iio/adc/ad7606_par.c b/drivers/iio/adc/ad7606_par.c > index a25182a3daa7..0c1177f436f3 100644 > --- a/drivers/iio/adc/ad7606_par.c > +++ b/drivers/iio/adc/ad7606_par.c > static int ad7606_bi_update_scan_mode(struct iio_dev *indio_dev, const unsigned long *scan_mask) > { > struct ad7606_state *st = iio_priv(indio_dev); > @@ -70,7 +83,7 @@ static int ad7606_bi_setup_iio_backend(struct device *dev, struct iio_dev *indio > if (ret) > return ret; > > - ret = devm_iio_backend_enable(dev, st->back); > + ret = devm_iio_backend_enable(st->dev, st->back); Is that a different dev? That's not obvious... > if (ret) > return ret; > > @@ -86,9 +99,52 @@ static int ad7606_bi_setup_iio_backend(struct device *dev, struct iio_dev *indio > return 0; > } > > +static int ad7606_bi_reg_read(struct iio_dev *indio_dev, unsigned int addr) > +{ > + struct ad7606_state *st = iio_priv(indio_dev); > + int val, ret; > + struct ad7606_platform_data *pdata = st->dev->platform_data; > + > + iio_device_claim_direct_scoped(return -EBUSY, indio_dev) { > + ret = pdata->bus_reg_read(st->back, > + addr, > + &val); As below. > + } > + if (ret < 0) > + return ret; > + > + return val; > +} > + > +static int ad7606_bi_reg_write(struct iio_dev *indio_dev, > + unsigned int addr, > + unsigned int val) > +{ > + struct ad7606_state *st = iio_priv(indio_dev); > + struct ad7606_platform_data *pdata = st->dev->platform_data; > + int ret; > + > + iio_device_claim_direct_scoped(return -EBUSY, indio_dev) { Given David's if_not_cond_guard() should land shortly I'd prefer to use that going forwards for cases like this. > + ret = pdata->bus_reg_write(st->back, > + addr, > + val); Put parameters all on one line. + return here (which needs the new if_not_cond_guard() to avoid confusing the compiler). > + } > + return ret; > +}