On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 1:11 PM, Eva Rachel Retuya <eraretuya@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: Missed commit message is no-no! > Signed-off-by: Eva Rachel Retuya <eraretuya@xxxxxxxxx> > -int adxl345_core_probe(struct device *dev, struct regmap *regmap, > - const char *name); > +int adxl345_core_probe(struct device *dev, struct regmap *regmap, int irq, > + const char *name, bool use_int2); Hmm... And tomorrow you will add another flag and another. No, consider to use something like struct adxl345_chip { struct device *dev; struct regmap *regmap; const char *name; } Convert your probe to use it, and after extend for your needs. > #define ADXL345_DEVID 0xE5 > > +#define ADXL345_IRQ_NAME "adxl345_event" > struct adxl345_data { > + struct iio_trigger *drdy_trig; > struct regmap *regmap; > + bool drdy_trig_on; > u8 data_range; drdy -> data_ready > +static irqreturn_t adxl345_irq(int irq, void *p) > +{ > + struct iio_dev *indio_dev = p; > + struct adxl345_data *data = iio_priv(indio_dev); > + int ret = IRQ_NONE; > + u32 int_stat; > + > + ret = regmap_read(data->regmap, ADXL345_REG_INT_SOURCE, &int_stat); > + if (ret < 0) > + return ret; It makes little sense AFAIU. > + > + if (int_stat & ADXL345_INT_DATA_READY) { > + iio_trigger_poll(data->drdy_trig); > + ret = IRQ_HANDLED; > + } > + > + return ret; Useless variable ret. You may return values directly. > +} > + > +static int adxl345_drdy_trigger_set_state(struct iio_trigger *trig, bool state) > +{ > + struct iio_dev *indio_dev = iio_trigger_get_drvdata(trig); > + struct adxl345_data *data = iio_priv(indio_dev); > + struct device *dev; > + int ret; > + > + dev = regmap_get_device(data->regmap); This may be moved to definition block. > + ret = regmap_update_bits(data->regmap, ADXL345_REG_INT_ENABLE, > + ADXL345_INT_DATA_READY, (state ? > + ADXL345_INT_DATA_READY : 0)); No way: Don't split lines like this. Remove extra parens. > +static const struct iio_trigger_ops adxl345_trigger_ops = { > + .owner = THIS_MODULE, I dunno if we still need this. > static const struct iio_info adxl345_info = { > .driver_module = THIS_MODULE, Ditto. > .read_raw = adxl345_read_raw, > }; > + /* > + * Any bits set to 0 send their respective interrupts to the INT1 pin, > + * whereas bits set to 1 send their respective interrupts to the INT2 > + * pin. Map all interrupts to the specified pin. > + */ > + if (!use_int2) > + ret = regmap_write(data->regmap, ADXL345_REG_INT_MAP, 0x00); > + else > + ret = regmap_write(data->regmap, ADXL345_REG_INT_MAP, 0xFF); I would create a temporary variable to hold the value and call regmap_write() unconditionally. > - return iio_device_register(indio_dev); You are not supposed to ping-pong changes in your series. Make clear your goal either you do like above or like below. If you choose latter, don't alter it in previous patch. > + if (irq > 0) { > + ret = > + devm_request_threaded_irq(dev, irq, NULL, adxl345_irq, Don't split lines like this. > + IRQF_TRIGGER_HIGH | IRQF_ONESHOT, Are you sure you have threaded IRQ handler? > + ret = iio_device_register(indio_dev); > + if (ret < 0) { > + dev_err(dev, "iio_device_register failed: %d\n", ret); > + goto err_trigger_unregister; > + } > + > + return ret; > +err_trigger_unregister: > + if (data->drdy_trig) > + iio_trigger_unregister(data->drdy_trig); > + > + return ret; So, doesn't devm_iio_*() provide a facility to avoid this? > @@ -229,6 +334,8 @@ int adxl345_core_remove(struct device *dev) > struct adxl345_data *data = iio_priv(indio_dev); > > iio_device_unregister(indio_dev); > + if (data->drdy_trig) > + iio_trigger_unregister(data->drdy_trig); Ditto. > --- a/drivers/iio/accel/adxl345_i2c.c > +++ b/drivers/iio/accel/adxl345_i2c.c > - return adxl345_core_probe(&client->dev, regmap, id ? id->name : NULL); > + irq = of_irq_get_byname(client->dev.of_node, "INT2"); > + if (irq == client->irq) > + use_int2 = true; Can't you use platform_get_irq() instead? > - return adxl345_core_probe(&spi->dev, regmap, id->name); > + irq = of_irq_get_byname(spi->dev.of_node, "INT2"); > + if (irq == spi->irq) > + use_int2 = true; Ditto. P.S. Are you doing this stuff on your own or you are working for some company? If the latter applies, please, consider to do *internal* review first. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html