On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 2:37 PM Jonathan Cameron <jic23@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 22:03:14 +0000
> Lothar Rubusch <l.rubusch@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Replace write() data_format by regmap_update_bits(), because bus specific
> > pre-configuration may have happened before on the same register. For
> > further updates to the data_format register then bus pre-configuration
> > needs to be masked out.
> >
> > Remove the data_range field from the struct adxl345_data, because it is
> > not used anymore.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Lothar Rubusch <l.rubusch@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/iio/accel/adxl345_core.c | 18 ++++++++++++------
> > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/iio/accel/adxl345_core.c b/drivers/iio/accel/adxl345_core.c
> > index 8bd30a23e..35df5e372 100644
> > --- a/drivers/iio/accel/adxl345_core.c
> > +++ b/drivers/iio/accel/adxl345_core.c
> > @@ -37,7 +37,15 @@
> > #define ADXL345_POWER_CTL_MEASURE BIT(3)
> > #define ADXL345_POWER_CTL_STANDBY 0x00
> >
> > +#define ADXL345_DATA_FORMAT_RANGE GENMASK(1, 0) /* Set the g range */
> > +#define ADXL345_DATA_FORMAT_JUSTIFY BIT(2) /* Left-justified (MSB) mode */
> > #define ADXL345_DATA_FORMAT_FULL_RES BIT(3) /* Up to 13-bits resolution */
> > +#define ADXL345_DATA_FORMAT_SELF_TEST BIT(7) /* Enable a self test */
> > +#define ADXL345_DATA_FORMAT_MSK (ADXL345_DATA_FORMAT_RANGE | \
> > + ADXL345_DATA_FORMAT_JUSTIFY | \
> > + ADXL345_DATA_FORMAT_FULL_RES | \
> > + ADXL345_DATA_FORMAT_SELF_TEST)
> This needs renaming. It's not a mask of everything in the register, or
> even just of everything related to format.
>
> Actually I'd just not have this definition. Use the build up value
> from all the submasks at the call site. Then we are just making it clear
> only a subset of fields are being cleared.
>
I understand this solution was not very useful. I'm not sure, I
understood you correctly. Please have a look into v6 if this matches
your comment.
Now, I remove the mask, instead I use a local variable in core's
probe() for the update mask. I added a comment. Nevertheless, I keep
the used flags for FORMAT_DATA. Does this go into the direction of
using the build up value from the submasks at the call site?
> Jonathan
>
> > +
> > #define ADXL345_DATA_FORMAT_2G 0
> > #define ADXL345_DATA_FORMAT_4G 1
> > #define ADXL345_DATA_FORMAT_8G 2
> > @@ -48,7 +56,6 @@
> > struct adxl345_data {
> > const struct adxl345_chip_info *info;
> > struct regmap *regmap;
> > - u8 data_range;
> > };
> >
> > #define ADXL345_CHANNEL(index, axis) { \
> > @@ -218,15 +225,14 @@ int adxl345_core_probe(struct device *dev, struct regmap *regmap)
> >
> > data = iio_priv(indio_dev);
> > data->regmap = regmap;
> > - /* Enable full-resolution mode */
> > - data->data_range = ADXL345_DATA_FORMAT_FULL_RES;
> > data->info = device_get_match_data(dev);
> > if (!data->info)
> > return -ENODEV;
> >
> > - ret = regmap_write(data->regmap, ADXL345_REG_DATA_FORMAT,
> > - data->data_range);
> > - if (ret < 0)
> > + /* Enable full-resolution mode */
> > + ret = regmap_update_bits(regmap, ADXL345_REG_DATA_FORMAT,
> > + ADXL345_DATA_FORMAT_MSK, ADXL345_DATA_FORMAT_FULL_RES);
> > + if (ret)
> > return dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "Failed to set data range\n");
> >
> > indio_dev->name = data->info->name;
>
