From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Guenter Roeck Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] hwmon/ltc2990: Add platform_data support Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2019 01:02:37 -0700 Message-ID: <20190813080237.GA29986@roeck-us.net> References: <20190812235237.21797-1-max@enpas.org> <20190812235237.21797-3-max@enpas.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190812235237.21797-3-max@enpas.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Max Staudt Cc: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux-hwmon@vger.kernel.org, Wolfram Sang , Jean Delvare , linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de List-Id: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 01:52:36AM +0200, Max Staudt wrote: > This allows code using i2c_new_device() to specify a measurement mode. > > Signed-off-by: Max Staudt > Reviewed-by: Geert Uytterhoeven > --- > drivers/hwmon/ltc2990.c | 9 +++++++++ > include/linux/platform_data/ltc2990.h | 11 +++++++++++ > 2 files changed, 20 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 include/linux/platform_data/ltc2990.h > > diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/ltc2990.c b/drivers/hwmon/ltc2990.c > index f9431ad43..f19b9c50c 100644 > --- a/drivers/hwmon/ltc2990.c > +++ b/drivers/hwmon/ltc2990.c > @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@ > #include > #include > #include > +#include > > #define LTC2990_STATUS 0x00 > #define LTC2990_CONTROL 0x01 > @@ -206,6 +207,7 @@ static int ltc2990_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *i2c, > int ret; > struct device *hwmon_dev; > struct ltc2990_data *data; > + struct ltc2990_platform_data *pdata = dev_get_platdata(&i2c->dev); > struct device_node *of_node = i2c->dev.of_node; > > if (!i2c_check_functionality(i2c->adapter, I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_BYTE_DATA | > @@ -227,6 +229,13 @@ static int ltc2990_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *i2c, > if (data->mode[0] & ~LTC2990_MODE0_MASK || > data->mode[1] & ~LTC2990_MODE1_MASK) > return -EINVAL; > + } else if (pdata) { > + data->mode[0] = pdata->meas_mode[0]; > + data->mode[1] = pdata->meas_mode[1]; > + > + if (data->mode[0] & ~LTC2990_MODE0_MASK || > + data->mode[1] & ~LTC2990_MODE1_MASK) > + return -EINVAL; I would prefer if the driver was modified to accept device properties, and if those were set using the appropriate fwnode function. Any reason for not doing that ? Thanks, Guenter