public inbox for linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Cc: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>,
	Linux I2C <linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux-Renesas <linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org>,
	Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] i2c: refactor parsing of timings
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2020 11:52:41 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200326105241.GA1538@ninjato> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMuHMdXVy1acwXxD9C==gGve-Xb-oPbF7BOpu1BaT=1gvUTdQQ@mail.gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1523 bytes --]

Hi Geert,

> > +{
> > +       int ret;
> > +
> > +       ret = device_property_read_u32(dev, prop_name, cur_val_p);
> > +       if (ret && use_def)
> > +               *cur_val_p = def_val;
> 
> Alternatively, you could just preinitialize the value with the default value
> before calling this function, and ignoring ret.
> That would remove the need for both the def_val and use_def parameters.

I can't do that because if !use_def and ret, then the value must not be
changed.

> > +       if (t->bus_freq_hz <= I2C_MAX_STANDARD_MODE_FREQ)
> > +               d = 1000;
> > +       else if (t->bus_freq_hz <= I2C_MAX_FAST_MODE_FREQ)
> > +               d = 300;
> > +       else
> > +               d = 120;
> > +       i2c_parse_timing(dev, "i2c-scl-rising-time-ns", &t->scl_rise_ns, d, u);
> >
> > -       ret = device_property_read_u32(dev, "i2c-analog-filter-cutoff-frequency", &t->analog_filter_cutoff_freq_hz);
> > -       if (ret && use_defaults)
> > -               t->analog_filter_cutoff_freq_hz = 0;
> > +       if (t->bus_freq_hz <= I2C_MAX_FAST_MODE_FREQ)
> > +               d = 300;
> > +       else
> > +               d = 120;
> 
> Is the difference with above intentional, or an oversight?

If this is an oversight, then it is also in the I2C specs ;)

> if the former, I like the dreaded ternary operator (only) for cases like this:
> 
>     d = t->bus_freq_hz <= I2C_MAX_FAST_MODE_FREQ ? 300 : 120

Yup, that would be an improvement!

Thanks,

   Wolfram


[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-03-26 10:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-03-26 10:16 [RFC PATCH] i2c: refactor parsing of timings Wolfram Sang
2020-03-26 10:36 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2020-03-26 10:50   ` Andy Shevchenko
2020-03-26 10:52   ` Wolfram Sang [this message]
2020-03-26 11:15     ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2020-03-26 12:05       ` Andy Shevchenko
2020-03-26 10:47 ` Andy Shevchenko
2020-03-26 11:00   ` Wolfram Sang
2020-03-26 11:16     ` Andy Shevchenko

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20200326105241.GA1538@ninjato \
    --to=wsa@the-dreams.de \
    --cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
    --cc=linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox