Re: [PATCH v2 03/15] iio: adc: rzg2l_adc: Use devres helpers to request pre-deasserted reset controls

[Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>]

On Fri,  6 Dec 2024 13:13:25 +0200
Claudiu <claudiu.beznea@tuxon.dev> wrote:

> From: Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea.uj@bp.renesas.com>
> 
> Starting with commit d872bed85036 ("reset: Add devres helpers to request
> pre-deasserted reset controls"), devres helpers are available to simplify
> the process of requesting pre-deasserted reset controls. Update the
> rzg2l_adc driver to utilize these helpers, reducing complexity in this
> way.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea.uj@bp.renesas.com>
> ---
> 
> Changes in v2:
> - rebased on top of patch 2/15 from this version
> - used "failed to get/deassert" failure messages
> 
>  drivers/iio/adc/rzg2l_adc.c | 37 ++++++-------------------------------
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/iio/adc/rzg2l_adc.c b/drivers/iio/adc/rzg2l_adc.c
> index 8a804f81c04b..c0c13e99aa92 100644
> --- a/drivers/iio/adc/rzg2l_adc.c
> +++ b/drivers/iio/adc/rzg2l_adc.c
> @@ -411,11 +411,6 @@ static void rzg2l_adc_pm_runtime_set_suspended(void *data)
>  	pm_runtime_set_suspended(dev->parent);
>  }
>  
> -static void rzg2l_adc_reset_assert(void *data)
> -{
> -	reset_control_assert(data);
> -}
> -
>  static int rzg2l_adc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  {
>  	struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> @@ -448,34 +443,14 @@ static int rzg2l_adc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  	if (IS_ERR(adc->adclk))
>  		return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(adc->adclk), "Failed to get adclk");
>  
> -	adc->adrstn = devm_reset_control_get_exclusive(dev, "adrst-n");
> +	adc->adrstn = devm_reset_control_get_exclusive_deasserted(dev, "adrst-n");
>  	if (IS_ERR(adc->adrstn))
> -		return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(adc->adrstn), "failed to get adrstn\n");
> -
> -	adc->presetn = devm_reset_control_get_exclusive(dev, "presetn");
> -	if (IS_ERR(adc->presetn))
> -		return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(adc->presetn), "failed to get presetn\n");
> -
> -	ret = reset_control_deassert(adc->adrstn);
> -	if (ret)
> -		return dev_err_probe(&pdev->dev, ret, "failed to deassert adrstn pin, %d\n", ret);
> -
> -	ret = devm_add_action_or_reset(&pdev->dev,
> -				       rzg2l_adc_reset_assert, adc->adrstn);
> -	if (ret) {
Huh. Missed this in previous. These brackets shouldn't be there.
> -		return dev_err_probe(&pdev->dev, ret,
> -				     "failed to register adrstn assert devm action, %d\n", ret);
> -	}
> +		return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(adc->adrstn), "failed to get/deassert adrst-n\n");
>  
> -	ret = reset_control_deassert(adc->presetn);
> -	if (ret)
> -		return dev_err_probe(&pdev->dev, ret, "failed to deassert presetn pin, %d\n", ret);
> -
> -	ret = devm_add_action_or_reset(&pdev->dev,
> -				       rzg2l_adc_reset_assert, adc->presetn);
> -	if (ret) {
> -		return dev_err_probe(&pdev->dev, ret,
> -				     "failed to register presetn assert devm action, %d\n", ret);
> +	adc->presetn = devm_reset_control_get_exclusive_deasserted(dev, "presetn");
> +	if (IS_ERR(adc->presetn)) {
Adding bracket here both makes limited sense and messes up the diff. I dropped them.

Jonathan

> +		return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(adc->presetn),
> +				     "failed to get/deassert presetn\n");
>  	}
>  
>  	ret = rzg2l_adc_hw_init(adc);