From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.21]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 449BF2EBDFA; Tue, 5 May 2026 08:17:14 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.21 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1777969036; cv=none; b=CR1kHgqvNZM/kbkAemMj5Kosdeq8IIZn3SvmuT0K5BsKc74ZGZBqaEIRomC5pcfeLJqEnqGQu1IVEqgSiISUs/s0d/8mqdVPSqh2m34dsJqcQWddBSYAoRy7J614WvgpfxUbrxm4F5WLkZG1HWt4qln1VoqMXynY2Yt1e8i5oHE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1777969036; c=relaxed/simple; bh=8SD0U/zGj0i2YxFSH7nIFBO7d96EnHl9ib1TOIdCKq4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=GF/sOu+qydzYAgXDYSc38+QYv4I+UaZEpCbZfcjuRY5P1Qppovf1bsTs4c4lsHEQUhfhKZWXKkdhiEwfvSqNBGv1mWBv8XhhGLOsYTQEv0QukKRZxxB7b8xkbZpLpA+bC9sPxP5fvCIW+WBF8wjnGDR45EvyJra6a+2Ssq7NLjo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=O5YS78qR; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.21 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="O5YS78qR" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1777969035; x=1809505035; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=8SD0U/zGj0i2YxFSH7nIFBO7d96EnHl9ib1TOIdCKq4=; b=O5YS78qR5RWjNEs8yYAot6bX2VRCM+VxR5NXV3Yq5+TEUfwuu2NFABSO K1VGlbAPSBd0rRmQE+Hy0foldLu+2TbhU6hG40YwgFDutcPTBxAwtV8JV Hcube2AKnWqAp9dLM76sg5OzoitHkavV14UTm6bCXPc26OhDxLf4sAsSM pJitz7gBaNK3azHhCpyhBTVwWio2R1G4N7BbKnEGEk7wvnI00x2Ui42Tq O+qWE9y4mzsTP+tQFtDP8xG075lILIwiIOJNlAtEEOLr3pn1yIoKR03wO fPOsuCY+OaeAoNo6IdnGX5mYbagv5C2SQto7eJJdv3oM8004Gy+7wAKsP g==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: xsMS2cw2SxuNwgtcHupESw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: lc+VEiQFRdCxhHfIQfWWkA== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6800,10657,11776"; a="78737994" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.23,217,1770624000"; d="scan'208";a="78737994" Received: from orviesa005.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.145]) by orvoesa113.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 05 May 2026 01:17:13 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: vIGsgZt/RSKZxuqxpZVCQg== X-CSE-MsgGUID: i5h/cm5GTFme7EWeA2xcWQ== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.23,217,1770624000"; d="scan'208";a="240739938" Received: from vpanait-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.245.244.5]) by orviesa005-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 05 May 2026 01:17:10 -0700 Date: Tue, 5 May 2026 11:17:08 +0300 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Joshua Crofts Cc: Jonathan Cameron , Joshua Crofts via B4 Relay , David Lechner , Nuno =?iso-8859-1?Q?S=E1?= , Andy Shevchenko , linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 06/17] iio: magnetometer: ak8975: modernize polling loops with iopoll() macros Message-ID: References: <20260504-magnetometer-fixes-v4-0-a291c2a7c71a@gmail.com> <20260504-magnetometer-fixes-v4-6-a291c2a7c71a@gmail.com> <20260504160606.07f87f10@jic23-huawei> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-iio@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - c/o Alberga Business Park, 6 krs, Bertel Jungin Aukio 5, 02600 Espoo On Tue, May 05, 2026 at 10:07:57AM +0200, Joshua Crofts wrote: > On Tue, 5 May 2026 at 09:26, Joshua Crofts wrote: > > > It's better to integrate it into the series either as a fix (should be first in > > > the series) or as just an improvement after readx_*() conversion patch. > > > > Better to do it as an improvement after readx_(), rebasing would be easier. I do > > agree with it being added as a separate patch though. > > Before I forget, is it better to return the negative 'val' or -EINVAL? The (negative) contents of val. Shadowing the error code must be justified. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko