On Sun, 3 Mar 2019 11:01:09 -0300 Renato Lui Geh <renatogeh@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 03/01, Ardelean, Alexandru wrote: > >On Thu, 2019-02-28 at 11:24 -0300, Renato Lui Geh wrote: > >> > >> > >> The ad7780 supports both the ad778x and ad717x families. Each chip has > >> a corresponding ID. This patch provides a mask for extracting ID values > >> from the status bits and also macros for the correct values for the > >> ad7170, ad7171, ad7780 and ad7781. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Renato Lui Geh <renatogeh@xxxxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> drivers/staging/iio/adc/ad7780.c | 8 ++++++-- > >> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/staging/iio/adc/ad7780.c > >> b/drivers/staging/iio/adc/ad7780.c > >> index 56c49e28f432..ad7617a3a141 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/staging/iio/adc/ad7780.c > >> +++ b/drivers/staging/iio/adc/ad7780.c > >> @@ -26,10 +26,14 @@ > >> #define AD7780_RDY BIT(7) > >> #define AD7780_FILTER BIT(6) > >> #define AD7780_ERR BIT(5) > >> -#define AD7780_ID1 BIT(4) > >> -#define AD7780_ID0 BIT(3) > >> #define AD7780_GAIN BIT(2) > >> > >> +#define AD7170_ID 0 > >> +#define AD7171_ID 1 > >> +#define AD7780_ID 1 > >> +#define AD7781_ID 0 > >> + > >> +#define AD7780_ID_MASK (BIT(3) | BIT(4)) > > > >This also doesn't have any functionality change. > >The AD7170_ID, AD7171_ID, AD7780_ID & AD7781_ID IDs are also unused (maybe > >in a later patch they are ?). > > They aren't. I added them following a previous review suggestion. Should > I remove them? Can we check them? It's always useful to confirm that the device is the one you think it is. Then we can either use what is there with a suitable warning, or if that is tricky just fault out as the dt is giving us the wrong part number. J > > > >I would also leave the AD7780_ID1 & AD7780_ID0 definitions in place, since > >they're easier matched with the datasheet. > > > >> > >> #define AD7780_PATTERN_GOOD 1 > >> #define AD7780_PATTERN_MASK GENMASK(1, 0) > >> -- > >> 2.21.0 > >>
