Hi Manivannan, On Thu, Oct 03, 2019 at 11:03:38AM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote: .... > > > > > +static int imx290_set_gain(struct imx290 *imx290, u32 value) > > > > > +{ > > > > > + int ret; > > > > > + > > > > > + u32 adjusted_value = (value * 10) / 3; > > > > > > > > What's the purpose of this? Why not to use the value directly? > > > > > > > > > > The gain register accepts the value 10/3 of the actual gain required. Hence, > > > we need to manually do the calculation before updating the value. I can > > > add a comment here to clarify. > > > > It's better to use the register value directly. Otherwise the granularity > > won't be available to the user space. > > > > The sensor datasheet clearly defines that the 10/3'rd of the expected gain > should be set to this register. So, IMO we should be setting the value as The unit of that gain is decibels, but the controls do not have a unit. Register value is really preferred here. > mentioned in the datasheet. I agree that we are missing the userspace > granularity here but sticking to the device limitation shouldn't be a problem. > As I said, I'll add a comment here to clarify. The comment isn't visible in the uAPI. > > > > > > > > > + > > > > > + ret = imx290_write_buffered_reg(imx290, IMX290_GAIN, 1, adjusted_value); > > > > > + if (ret) > > > > > + dev_err(imx290->dev, "Unable to write gain\n"); > > > > > + > > > > > + return ret; > > > > > +} > > > > > + > > > > > +static int imx290_set_power_on(struct imx290 *imx290) > > > > > +{ > > > > > + int ret; > > > > > + > > > > > + ret = clk_prepare_enable(imx290->xclk); > > > > > > > > Please move the code from this function to the runtime PM runtime suspend > > > > callback. The same for imx290_set_power_off(). > > > > > > > > > > May I know why? I think since this is being used only once, you're suggesting > > > to move to the callback function itself but please see the comment below. I > > > will reuse this function to power on the device during probe. > > > > Yes, you can call the same function from probe, even if it's used as a > > runtime PM callback. > > > > There's no need to have a function that acts as a wrapper for calling it > > with a different type of an argument. > > > > You mean directly calling imx290_runtime_resume() from probe is fine? Yes. Feel free to call it e.g. imx290_power_on or something. -- Regards, Sakari Ailus