On Wed, 8 Jun 2022 23:11:51 +0300
Cosmin Tanislav <demonsingur@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 6/8/22 18:59, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 8, 2022 at 12:19 PM Cosmin Tanislav <demonsingur@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >> AD4130-8 is an ultra-low power, high precision, measurement solution for
> >> low bandwidth battery operated applications.
> >>
> >> The fully integrated AFE (Analog Front-End) includes a multiplexer for up
> >> to 16 single-ended or 8 differential inputs, PGA (Programmable Gain
> >> Amplifier), 24-bit Sigma-Delta ADC, on-chip reference and oscillator,
> >> selectable filter options, smart sequencer, sensor biasing and excitation
> >> options, diagnostics, and a FIFO buffer.
> >
> > I believe we may gain a few LoCs by slightly bending the rule of 80.
> > Also see below.
> >
>
> I'll only go over the 80 columns limit if Jonathan agrees to it.
Where it helps readability I fine with us going past 80.
I'm not convinced by every case Andy highlights, but many do
make things easier to read.
>
> >> + *size = ad4130_reg_size[reg];
> >> + if (!*size)
> >> + return -EINVAL;
> >
> > Is this check necessary?
> >
>
> Yes. I haven't described all registers in the table, and the registers
> can be accessed by the user via the debugfs_reg_access() method.
For that one, probably worth a comment as not immediately obvious.
>
...
>
> >> + switch (ref_sel) {
> >> + case AD4130_REF_REFIN1:
> >> + ret = regulator_get_voltage(st->regulators[2].consumer);
> >> + break;
> >> + case AD4130_REF_REFIN2:
> >> + ret = regulator_get_voltage(st->regulators[3].consumer);
> >> + break;
> >> + case AD4130_REF_AVDD_AVSS:
> >> + ret = regulator_get_voltage(st->regulators[0].consumer);
> >> + break;
> >> + case AD4130_REF_REFOUT_AVSS:
> >> + ret = st->int_ref_uv;
> >> + break;
> >> + default:
> >> + ret = -EINVAL;
> >> + break;
> >> + }
> >
> >> + if (ret < 0)
> >> + return dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "Cannot use reference %u\n",
> >> + ref_sel);
> >
> > Can it be moved to the caller where it would cleaner to use, I think?
> > As a good side effect the all above will be shortened to just return directly.
> >
>
> I'm pretty sure I remember Jonathan suggested moving it inside the
> function.
It's possible, though I don't know what my reasoning would have been...
