On 29/2/24 03:57, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 03:08:56PM +0200, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
On 2/28/24 14:24, Subhajit Ghosh wrote:
...
+ ret = iio_gts_find_new_gain_by_old_gain_time(&data->gts, gain_old,
+ intg_old, val2, &gain_new);
You don't use the 'ret' here, so maybe for the clarity, not assign it.
Or, maybe you wan't to try to squeeze out few cycles for succesful case and
check the ret for '0' - in which case you should be able to omit the check
right below as well as the call to iio_find_closest_gain_low(). OTOH, this
is likely not a "hot path" so I don't care too much about the extra call if
you think code is clearer this way.
+ if (gain_new < 0) {
+ dev_err_ratelimited(dev, "Unsupported gain with time\n");
+ return gain_new;
+ }
What is the difference between negative response from the function itself and
similar in gain_new?
-ve response form the function is an error condition.
-ve value in gain_new means - no valid gains could be computed.
In case of error conditions from the function, the gain_new is also set to -1.
My use case is valid hardware gain so I went for checking only gain_new.
Matti will be the best person to answer on this.
Regards,
Subhajit Ghosh
