Re: [PATCH v3 6/8] iio: sx9324: Add Setting for internal compensation resistor

[Jonathan Cameron <jic23@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 25 Mar 2022 19:04:32 -0500
Stephen Boyd <swboyd@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Quoting Gwendal Grignou (2022-03-25 15:08:25)
> > diff --git a/drivers/iio/proximity/sx9324.c b/drivers/iio/proximity/sx9324.c
> > index 3f229dffd5380..38dfdc6dc86ad 100644
> > --- a/drivers/iio/proximity/sx9324.c
> > +++ b/drivers/iio/proximity/sx9324.c
> > @@ -875,6 +881,22 @@ sx9324_get_default_reg(struct device *dev, int idx,
> >                                SX9324_REG_AFE_PH0_PIN_MASK(pin);
> >                 reg_def->def = raw;
> >                 break;
> > +       case SX9324_REG_AFE_CTRL0:
> > +               ret = device_property_read_string(dev,
> > +                               "semtech,int-comp-resistor", &res);
> > +               if (ret)
> > +                       break;
> > +               reg_def->def &= ~SX9324_REG_AFE_CTRL0_RINT_MASK;
> > +               if (!strcmp(res, "lowest"))
> > +                       reg_def->def |= SX9324_REG_AFE_CTRL0_RINT_LOWEST;
> > +               else if (!strcmp(res, "low"))
> > +                       reg_def->def |= SX9324_REG_AFE_CTRL0_RINT_LOW;
> > +               else if (!strcmp(res, "high"))  
> 
> Should the order of arguments be swapped? I'm wondering if I can have
> 'hig' in the DT property and then it will match 'high' here? I suppose
> the schema validator will find that and complain first.

Wouldn't that result in a failed match between the null terminator of the first
string and the 'h'? Hence I don't think it matters but maybe I'm missing something..

> 
> > +                       reg_def->def |= SX9324_REG_AFE_CTRL0_RINT_HIGH;
> > +               else if (!strcmp(res, "highest"))
> > +                       reg_def->def |= SX9324_REG_AFE_CTRL0_RINT_HIGHEST;
> > +
> > +               break;