Linux IIO development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>
To: Matt Ranostay <matt.ranostay@konsulko.com>
Cc: lars@metafoo.de, linux-iio@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iio: chemical: atlas-ezo-sensor: refactor IIO_CHAN_INFO_SCALE checks
Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2022 17:34:13 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20221203173413.356b6f89@jic23-huawei> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221202222305.8828-1-matt.ranostay@konsulko.com>

On Fri,  2 Dec 2022 14:23:05 -0800
Matt Ranostay <matt.ranostay@konsulko.com> wrote:

> Additional modifiers in IIO_CHAN_INFO_SCALE check will mostly have a ppm
> unit and the switch statement is more confusing, and adds unneeded code.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Matt Ranostay <matt.ranostay@konsulko.com>
Hi Matt,

Is this a precursor to more support where it doesn't just make sense to match on
the modifier, but rather have a default path?

Also, can we avoid the oddity of this code being reached by the fact
that only one case in the switch statement above doesn't return.
The code would be more readable to just do this stuff in 
case IIO_CONCENTRATION: 
and have slightly long lines.

> ---
>  drivers/iio/chemical/atlas-ezo-sensor.c | 18 ++++++++++--------
>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/iio/chemical/atlas-ezo-sensor.c b/drivers/iio/chemical/atlas-ezo-sensor.c
> index 307c3488f4bd..5fae1c4087ee 100644
> --- a/drivers/iio/chemical/atlas-ezo-sensor.c
> +++ b/drivers/iio/chemical/atlas-ezo-sensor.c
> @@ -165,17 +165,19 @@ static int atlas_ezo_read_raw(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
>  			return -EINVAL;
>  		}
>  
> -		/* IIO_CONCENTRATION modifiers */
> -		switch (chan->channel2) {
> -		case IIO_MOD_CO2:
> -			*val = 0;
> -			*val2 = 100; /* 0.0001 */
> -			return IIO_VAL_INT_PLUS_MICRO;
> -		case IIO_MOD_O2:
> +		if (chan->channel2 == IIO_NO_MOD)
> +			return -EINVAL;

This relies rather more on what values we actually have than the original
code.  Given we can't get to this code at all unless we have
a modifier (only applies to concentration channels which always do)
there isn't a lot of point in this check.

A sanity check on what we do have as a modifier and return -EINVAL
if none match would be better.

> +
> +		// IIO_CONCENTRATION modifier for percent
/* ... */
style preferred for IIO comments.

> +		if (chan->channel2 == IIO_MOD_O2) {
>  			*val = 100;
>  			return IIO_VAL_INT;
>  		}
> -		return -EINVAL;
> +
> +		// IIO_CONCENTRATION modifier for PPM - 0.0001
> +		*val = 0;
> +		*val2 = 100;
> +		return IIO_VAL_INT_PLUS_MICRO;
So this matches the IIO_MOD_
>  	}
>  
>  	return 0;


      reply	other threads:[~2022-12-03 17:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-12-02 22:23 [PATCH] iio: chemical: atlas-ezo-sensor: refactor IIO_CHAN_INFO_SCALE checks Matt Ranostay
2022-12-03 17:34 ` Jonathan Cameron [this message]

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=20221203173413.356b6f89@jic23-huawei \
    --to=jic23@kernel.org \
    --cc=lars@metafoo.de \
    --cc=linux-iio@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=matt.ranostay@konsulko.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