On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 9:01 PM, David Daney <ddaney@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 02/15/2018 04:45 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 2:55 AM, David Daney <david.daney@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> The ISL12026 is a combination RTC and EEPROM device with I2C
>>> interface. The standard RTC driver interface is provided. The EEPROM
>>> is accessed via the NVMEM interface via the "eeprom0" directory in the
>>> sysfs entry for the device.
>>> + /* 2 bytes of address, most significant first */
>>> + addr[0] = (offset >> 8) & 0xff;
>>> + addr[1] = offset & 0xff;
>>
>>
>> Consider to drop '& 0xff', they are pointless (you have u8 type).
>
>
> Generated code is the same, but the intent of the code is less clear when
> the explicit masking is removed. Never the less, since this seems to be
> impeding progress, I will remove it.
You can use the following:
addr[0] = offset >> 8;
addr[1] = offset >> 0;
>>> + bool set_bsw, set_sbib;
>>> +
>>> + ret = of_property_read_u32(client->dev.of_node,
>>> + "isil,pwr-bsw", &bsw_val);
>>> + set_bsw = (ret == 0);
>> Which is not fully correct. Better to do
> I think it is correct. The properties are optional, so it it perfectly fine
> for of_property_read_u32() to fail. If it fails, we simply keep the current
> value. I will add comments to document the intended logic.
OK.
>> set_bsw = of_property_present();
> There are no occurrences of "of_property_present" in my source tree.
Ah, indeed.
>> ret = of_property_read...();
>> if (ret)
>> return ret;
What about then
set_bsw = of_property_read_bool();
set_sbid = ...
if (!x && !y)
return ...
...
if (x) {
}
>>
>>> +
>>> + ret = of_property_read_u32(client->dev.of_node,
>>> + "isil,pwr-sbib", &sbib_val);
>>> + set_sbib = (ret == 0);
>>
>>
>> Ditto.
>>> + if (set_bsw) {
>>> + if (bsw_val)
>>> + requested_pwr |= ISL12026_REG_PWR_BSW;
>>> + else
>>> + requested_pwr &= ~ISL12026_REG_PWR_BSW;
>>> + }
>>
>>
>> Undefined state if no value?
> It is defined. See above.
It's opaque. Depends on firmware settings, boot loader, etc.
>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_OF
>> Remove this ugly #ifdef. Your driver OF only one.
> The driver doesn't require OF.
> By removing the #if (which I will do), the
> size of the module may be bloated in the non-OF case. If anybody cares
> about this, they can add back the #if.
Nobody.
>>> +static const struct of_device_id isl12026_dt_match[] = {
>>> + { .compatible = "isil,isl12026" },
>>> + { },
>>> +};
>>> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, isl12026_dt_match);
>>> + .of_match_table = of_match_ptr(isl12026_dt_match),
>> Drop of_match_ptr().
> Best to keep it so that the non-OF case is correctly handled.
If you drop above ifdef, you need to drop this macro. And code bloat is not big.
Btw, driver since ->probe_new() is become OF/ACPI only, so, otherwise
there will be no way to enumerate.
--
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
