On Tue, 1 Oct 2024 08:42:23 -0500
David Lechner <dlechner@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 10/1/24 3:26 AM, Alexandru Ardelean wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 19, 2024 at 4:05 PM Alexandru Ardelean
> > <aardelean@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
>
> ...
>
> >> @@ -153,7 +349,19 @@ static int ad7606_scan_direct(struct iio_dev *indio_dev, unsigned int ch,
> >> if (ret)
> >> goto error_ret;
> >>
> >> - *val = sign_extend32(st->data[ch], 15);
> >> + chan = &indio_dev->channels[ch + 1];
> >> + if (chan->scan_type.sign == 'u') {
> >> + if (storagebits > 16)
> >> + *val = st->data.buf32[ch];
> >> + else
> >> + *val = st->data.buf16[ch];
> >> + return 0;
> >
> > Arrggh...
> > I messed up here.
> > Guillaume found a bug here, where this should be "goto error_ret" or
> > do an "if () {} else {}"
> > How should we do it here?
if / else. Goto an error label when it's not an error would be horrible!
> >
> > Do we send a fix-patch or send a new series?
> >
>
> Since this patch is already applied, just follow up with another
> patch with a Fixes: tag.
I sometimes tweak these sort of things if I haven't pushed out
as togreg yet (or they are really bad!) but in this case I'm not
100% sure what the comment is, so I'll just apply a fix on top.
So David is entirely correct in general but by luck of timing
this time I'll tweak it.
Please check the result in iio.git/testing
I'll hold off pushing that out as togreg until at least end of
tomorrow. One more day o
Jonathan
>
>
>
