From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.9]) (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 B606D1D5145 for ; Thu, 20 Feb 2025 14:56:38 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.9 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1740063400; cv=none; b=QfK/BJqmS6102ajTuaWc5m2nWXTfo9QI6yi4HDAzqz6HSbba5Bg7ukYU2/Nns9FtedHXPyK52GRwUJCIofTrfxUA/LmiwIpSjYePgzDzgl6oNm7AxMPKnxNQdg7U2czgg0pd2URZBep/NzKQ3ZFnvaGA7MCwBIHQpr+k6mNsooQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1740063400; c=relaxed/simple; bh=YbwDdBsjti3If6R1AwRXFGvljRGPfJvCwZ3grv5CLiE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=gd9grvq2tI6Uu0Hwx7RLhaTzAosyUP4Schrnt8iv0+Av4LmYxHDVBa4910rTz+jMtdpqmebVcYTPP5zzyyPSk2mhJs34BGcLQu85lp8xB72wkOowGBifEqlJSYUV77ug4dk3FUZR9VLcou7ZHAtQecECb5BqxAwvFS+ShHCHvpg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=iqP9ND1I; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.9 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none 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="iqP9ND1I" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1740063399; x=1771599399; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=YbwDdBsjti3If6R1AwRXFGvljRGPfJvCwZ3grv5CLiE=; b=iqP9ND1I4iqJ8x9Jlcwv+TT458mjzOuVUzX2GbjmmiaMSCwVz3qJqikZ BvURC4gVeBkNJtjd5sTQ65GvuWap/+cgCQWV9Wl2p2Bn0CGWXDYGL7CbR IBj/WiGQVE0Jm6sLuAnVxuZGkFC5k3rlVWiCxcafEK6j91JFbVEUAM60X E8w1JJKlv0Hp9fUzJuKs02l9WpkOgfg15cFnimyUwPgiz3R9gNJ5dqsVe a95DpanRdNEDTe3TUdi5eq8iGRFobZyHemvAYklkPdV7rXPnWOqRQunMe /+WL4YDGcxHtHxLsdbtEA5rTaWNzTOpFRZD/9n/hppCuPI1Qf3RTgmjj/ g==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: Rph5u2y6SIGqw2a9s4TeOg== X-CSE-MsgGUID: JUFtoxRDRoS7TUxbtjF7dg== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6700,10204,11351"; a="63318717" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.13,301,1732608000"; d="scan'208";a="63318717" Received: from orviesa002.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.142]) by orvoesa101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 20 Feb 2025 06:56:38 -0800 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: kEVuldFkQf6vlSbyMU3vxA== X-CSE-MsgGUID: DEsCk3iDTmePuyZP91z/Nw== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.13,301,1732608000"; d="scan'208";a="145916713" Received: from smile.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.58]) by orviesa002.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 20 Feb 2025 06:56:34 -0800 Received: from andy by smile.fi.intel.com with local (Exim 4.98) (envelope-from ) id 1tl7yY-0000000DMq3-05wg; Thu, 20 Feb 2025 16:56:30 +0200 Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2025 16:56:29 +0200 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Matti Vaittinen Cc: Matti Vaittinen , Jonathan Cameron , Lars-Peter Clausen , Rob Herring , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Conor Dooley , Lad Prabhakar , Chen-Yu Tsai , Jernej Skrabec , Samuel Holland , Hugo Villeneuve , Nuno Sa , David Lechner , Javier Carrasco , linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-sunxi@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/9] iio: adc: add helpers for parsing ADC nodes Message-ID: References: <6c5b678526e227488592d004c315a967b9809701.1739967040.git.mazziesaccount@gmail.com> <9018e23c-da28-41b0-b774-1598b946a2a1@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-sunxi@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9018e23c-da28-41b0-b774-1598b946a2a1@gmail.com> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 04:21:37PM +0200, Matti Vaittinen wrote: > On 20/02/2025 16:04, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 03:40:30PM +0200, Matti Vaittinen wrote: > > > On 20/02/2025 14:41, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > > On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 09:13:00AM +0200, Matti Vaittinen wrote: > > > > > On 19/02/2025 22:41, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 02:30:27PM +0200, Matti Vaittinen wrote: ... > > > > > > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(iio_adc_device_num_channels); > > > > > > > > > > > > No namespace? > > > > > > > > > > I was considering also this. The IIO core functions don't belong into a > > > > > namespace - so I followed the convention to keep these similar to other IIO > > > > > core stuff. > > > > > > > > But it's historically. We have already started using namespaces > > > > in the parts of IIO, haven't we? > > > > > > Yes. But as I wrote, I don't think adding new namespaces for every helper > > > file with a function or two exported will scale. We either need something > > > common for IIO (or IIO "subsystems" like "adc", "accel", "light", ... ), or > > > then we just keep these small helpers same as most of the IIO core. > > > > It can be still pushed to IIO_CORE namespace. Do you see an issue with that? > > No. I've missed the fact we have IIO_CORE O_o. Thanks for pointing it out! > > > Or a new opaque namespace for the mentioned cases, something like IIO_HELPERS. > > I am unsure if it really benefits to split this out of the IIO_CORE. I've a > feeling it falls into the category of making things harder for user with no > apparent reason. But yes, the IIO_CORE makes sense. Probably I was not clear, I mean to put this under a given namespace. There is no a such, we have currently: IIO_BACKEND IIO_DMA_BUFFER IIO_DMAENGINE_BUFFER IIO_GTS_HELPER IIO_RESCALE > > > > > (Sometimes I have a feeling that the trend today is to try make things > > > > > intentionally difficult in the name of the safety. Like, "more difficult I > > > > > make this, more experience points I gain in the name of the safety".) > > > > > > > > > > Well, I suppose I could add a namespace for these functions - if this > > > > > approach stays - but I'd really prefer having all IIO core stuff in some > > > > > global IIO namespace and not to have dozens of fine-grained namespaces for > > > > > an IIO driver to use... ... > > > foo &= (~bar); > > > > > > is _much_ faster than seeing: > > > > Strongly disagree. One need to parse an additional pair of parentheses, > > and especially when it's a big statement inside with nested ones along > > with understanding what the heck is going on that you need them in the > > first place. > > > > On top of that, we have a common practices in the LK project and > > with our history of communication it seems you are trying to do differently > > from time to time. Sounds like a rebellion to me :-) > > I only rebel when I (in my opinion) have a solid reason :) > > > > foo &= ~bar; > > > > > > and having to google the priorities. > > > > Again, this is something a (regular) kernel developer keeps refreshed. > > Or even wider, C-language developer. > > Ha. As I mentioned, I've been writing C on a daily bases for almost 25 > years. I wonder if you intent to say I am not a kernel/C-language developer? > Bold claim. I'm just surprised by seeing that style from a 25y experienced C developer, that's all. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko