Re: [PATCH v2 5/8] iio: adc: ti-ads1015: Use guard(mutex) and factor out code for INFO_RAW

[Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>]

On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 18:18:57 -0500
David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com> wrote:

> On 3/9/25 11:58 AM, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > From: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>
> > 
> > By use of automatic lock release and introducing a new utility
> > function to handle the core activity of reading the ADC channel,
> > many more complex code flows can be replaced by direct returns.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>
> > Cc: Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>
> > ---  
> 
> ...
> 
> >  static int ads1015_read_event_config(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
> > @@ -710,25 +686,19 @@ static int ads1015_read_event_config(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
> >  	enum iio_event_direction dir)
> >  {
> >  	struct ads1015_data *data = iio_priv(indio_dev);
> > -	int ret = 0;
> >  
> > -	mutex_lock(&data->lock);
> > -	if (data->event_channel == chan->address) {
> > -		switch (dir) {
> > -		case IIO_EV_DIR_RISING:
> > -			ret = 1;
> > -			break;
> > -		case IIO_EV_DIR_EITHER:
> > -			ret = (data->comp_mode == ADS1015_CFG_COMP_MODE_WINDOW);
> > -			break;
> > -		default:
> > -			ret = -EINVAL;
> > -			break;
> > -		}
> > -	}
> > -	mutex_unlock(&data->lock);
> > +	guard(mutex)(&data->lock);
> > +	if (data->event_channel != chan->address)
> > +		return -EBUSY;  
> 
> The old code returned 0 in this case instead of -EBUSY, so this seems like an
> unrelated or unintentional change.
> 
Good catch, not intended so I've made it return 0.

Thanks,

> >  
> > -	return ret;
> > +	switch (dir) {
> > +	case IIO_EV_DIR_RISING:
> > +		return 1;
> > +	case IIO_EV_DIR_EITHER:
> > +		return (data->comp_mode == ADS1015_CFG_COMP_MODE_WINDOW);
> > +	default:
> > +		return -EINVAL;
> > +	}
> >  }
> >