On 1/10/23 14:47, Alexander Stein wrote:
Hello Marek,
Am Dienstag, 10. Januar 2023, 14:37:19 CET schrieb Marek Vasut:
On 1/10/23 14:22, Alexander Stein wrote:
Hi Marek,
Hi,
thanks for your feedback.
Am Dienstag, 10. Januar 2023, 11:31:49 CET schrieb Marek Vasut:
On 1/10/23 11:00, Alexander Stein wrote:
[...]
static int rs9_get_output_config(struct rs9_driver_data *rs9, int
idx)
{
struct i2c_client *client = rs9->client;
+ u8 dif = rs9_calc_dif(rs9, idx);
unsigned char name[5] = "DIF0";
struct device_node *np;
int ret;
u32 sr;
/* Set defaults */
- rs9->clk_dif_sr &= ~RS9_REG_SR_DIF_MASK(idx);
Are you sure this line ^ should be dropped ?
Shouldn't the bitfield be cleared first and modified second?
Well, I had in my mind that this function is called upon probe with
clk_dif_sr being cleared anyway, so this does essentially nothing. And
the DIF bit is set unconditionally, so what is the point of masking it
before?
Good point, but then, what's the point of ORRing either ? Just do a
plain assignment.
OR-ring is necessary as this function is called for each DIF output (see idx
parameter), so plain assignment will clear the previously set bits.
Ah, got it.
Reviewed-by: Marek Vasut <marex@xxxxxxx>
Thanks !
