Re: [PATCH v4 04/14] iio: accel: adxl345: introduce adxl345_push_event function

[Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>]

On Sun, 16 Mar 2025 21:58:00 +0200
Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thu, Mar 13, 2025 at 04:50:39PM +0000, Lothar Rubusch kirjoitti:
> > Move the fifo handling into a separate function. This is a preparation
> > for a generic handling of the interrupt status register results.
> > 
> > The interrupt status register is read into a variable int_stat. It carries
> > status for various sensor events, handling of which is added in follow up
> > patches. Evaluation of the int_stat variable is common for sensor events,
> > such as tap detection, freefall, activity,... and for fifo events, such as
> > data ready, overrun, watermark,... Also, dealing with in case error
> > returns shall be common to all events. Thus migrate fifo read-out and push
> > fifo content to iio channels into this function to be built up with
> > additional event handling.  
> 
> ...
> 
> > +static int adxl345_push_event(struct iio_dev *indio_dev, int int_stat)
> > +{
> > +	struct adxl345_state *st = iio_priv(indio_dev);
> > +	int samples;
> > +	int ret = -ENOENT;
> > +
> > +	if (FIELD_GET(ADXL345_INT_WATERMARK, int_stat)) {
> > +		samples = adxl345_get_samples(st);
> > +		if (samples < 0)  
> 
> > +			return -EINVAL;  
> 
> In the original code it makes no difference, but if you are going to share
> this, I would expect to see
> 
> 			return samples;
> 
> here. Why the error code is shadowed? If it's trully needed, it has to be
> explained in the comment.
> 
> 
> > +		if (adxl345_fifo_push(indio_dev, samples) < 0)
> > +			return -EINVAL;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	return ret;
> > +}  
> 
> ...
> 
> Jonathan, I saw that you had applied it, but I guess the above needs
> a clarification.
Was right at the top of a tree I don't mind rebasing. So dropped
this patch (kept 1-3)

>