On Sun, 2024-01-28 at 15:27 -0600, David Lechner wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 27, 2024 at 9:21 AM Jonathan Cameron <jic23@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 23 Jan 2024 16:14:30 +0100
> > Nuno Sa via B4 Relay <devnull+nuno.sa.analog.com@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > From: Nuno Sa <nuno.sa@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > Move to the IIO backend framework. Devices supported by adi-axi-adc now
> > > register themselves as backend devices.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Nuno Sa <nuno.sa@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > I'm still not getting the %d vs %c change..
> >
> > Otherwise LGTM
> >
> > > - if (cl->info->version > ver) {
> > > + if (*expected_ver > ver) {
> > > dev_err(&pdev->dev,
> > > - "IP core version is too old. Expected %d.%.2d.%c,
> > > Reported %d.%.2d.%c\n",
> > > - ADI_AXI_PCORE_VER_MAJOR(cl->info->version),
> > > - ADI_AXI_PCORE_VER_MINOR(cl->info->version),
> > > - ADI_AXI_PCORE_VER_PATCH(cl->info->version),
> > > + "IP core version is too old. Expected %d.%.2d.%d,
> > > Reported %d.%.2d.%c\n",
> >
> > If it's a valid change fine, but then I'd expect both %c to change.
> > I'd also expect it to be in a separate patch with an explanation of why.
>
> I was noticing this same pattern in other "AXI" drivers. I think the
> reason for the %c is to match the version format in the devicetree
> compatible string which looks like "1.00.a". So to fix this we should
> probably keep %c and change the value line to
> `ADI_AXI_PCORE_VER_PATCH(cl->info->version) + 'a'` to convert it to
> the appropriate ascii value.
>
> (But agree that this should be done in a separate patch/)
Yeah, I'm also realizing that with the axi-dac support I'm working on. In there,
the %c actually does it's job and prints the last character nicely. I will
double check but in this series it might just be that I have a subtle issue in
my hdl design.
So the plan for now is to just drop these changes and keep %c.
- Nuno Sá
