On Sun, 19 May 2024 22:37:58 +0300
Alisa-Dariana Roman <alisadariana@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 19.05.2024 21:03, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > On Tue, 14 May 2024 16:09:32 +0300
> > Andy Shevchenko <andy@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 03:02:22PM +0300, Alisa-Dariana Roman wrote:
> >>> Unlike the other AD719Xs, AD7194 has configurable channels. The user can
> >>> dynamically configure them in the devicetree.
> >>>
> >>> Add sigma_delta_info member to chip_info structure. Since AD7194 is the
> >>> only chip that has no channel sequencer, num_slots should remain
> >>> undefined.
> >>>
> >>> Also modify config AD7192 description for better scaling.
> >>
> >> Some non-critical, mostly style related comments below.
> >>
> > Tweaked a bit. And applied. Please check the result in the testing branch
> > of iio.git.
>
> Thank you guys for the feedback and for making the adjustments!
>
> +/* 10th bit corresponds to CON18(Pseudo) */
> +#define AD7194_CH(p) (BIT(10) | AD7194_CH_POS(p))
> +
> I noticed this comment got away in the testing branch.
>
>
> +static bool ad7194_validate_ain_channel(struct device *dev, u32 ain)
> +{
> + return in_range(ain, AD7194_CH_AIN_START, AD7194_CH_AIN_NR);
> +}
> And the negation got lost here.
Ouch :(
>
> With these little changes, tested on board to make sure, running perfectly!
>
To make sure I don't mess it up again, could you post the fix and I'll squash
it into the patch on the tree.
I blame caffeine (for no particularly reason ;)
Jonathan
> Kind regards,
> Alisa-Dariana Roman.
>
>
