On Nov 18 2011, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
On 11/17/2011 09:24 PM, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
On 11/16/2011 03:28 PM, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
This patch adds support for the Analog Devices D5380, AD5381,
AD5382, AD5383, AD5384, AD5390, AD5391, AD5392 multi-channel
Digital to Analog Converters.
Signed-off-by: Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@xxxxxxxxxx>
--- There should be no compile time dependencies to the regmap patches
earlier in this series, so this patch can be merged independently of
it.
Should probably have been a separate series! Doesn't matter for review
though and I guess you justified some of the other patches with it.
---
drivers/staging/iio/dac/Kconfig | 11 +
drivers/staging/iio/dac/Makefile | 1 +
drivers/staging/iio/dac/ad5380.c | 669
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3 files changed, 681 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 drivers/staging/iio/dac/ad5380.c
[...]
+
+static ssize_t ad5380_write_powerdown_mode(struct device *dev,
+ struct device_attribute *attr, const char *buf, size_t len)
+{
+ struct iio_dev *indio_dev = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
+ struct ad5380_state *st = iio_priv(indio_dev);
+ unsigned int i;
+ int ret;
+
Excess brackets for that for loop I think
I prefer to have them since the loop contains a multiple lines.
Hmm.. might be out of coding standard, but only just so fine...
+ for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(ad5380_powerdown_modes); ++i) {
+ if (sysfs_streq(buf, ad5380_powerdown_modes[i]))
+ break;
+ }
+
+ if (i == ARRAY_SIZE(ad5380_powerdown_modes))
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ ret = regmap_update_bits(st->regmap, AD5380_REG_SF_CTRL,
+ 1 << AD5380_CTRL_PWR_DOWN_MODE_OFFSET,
+ i << AD5380_CTRL_PWR_DOWN_MODE_OFFSET);
Obviously both of these will be cleaner with it as a bit.
When writing this using BIT it would be i ? AD5380_CTRL_PWR_DOWN_MODE_BIT :
0... And also this is about semantics. The other bits are bits in the sense
of true/false. While this is an enumeration which just happens to have only
one bit. But I can change it, if you prefer using BIT here.
Gah, I read them as both 1 <<. oops. you are of course correct that my
suggestion makes no sense so don't worry about that!
+
+ return ret ? ret : len;
+}
+
Not a comment on this driver, but we need to have a think about
whether these will ever want to be controlled via in kernel
interfaces and if so how the heck we are going to do it!
Yes, definitely. But I think it is best to discuss this in a separate
thread.
Agreed. Feel free to start it ;)
+static IIO_DEVICE_ATTR(out_voltage_powerdown_mode,
+ S_IRUGO | S_IWUSR,
+ ad5380_read_powerdown_mode,
+ ad5380_write_powerdown_mode, 0);
+
+static IIO_CONST_ATTR(out_voltage_powerdown_mode_available,
+ "100kohm_to_gnd three_state");
+
+static struct attribute *ad5380_attributes[] = {
+ &iio_dev_attr_out_voltage_powerdown.dev_attr.attr,
+ &iio_dev_attr_out_voltage_powerdown_mode.dev_attr.attr,
+ &iio_const_attr_out_voltage_powerdown_mode_available.dev_attr.attr,
+ NULL,
+};
[...]
+static const struct i2c_device_id ad5380_i2c_ids[] = {
+ { "ad5380-3", ID_AD5380_3 },
+ { "ad5380-5", ID_AD5380_5 },
+ { "ad5381-3", ID_AD5381_3 },
+ { "ad5381-5", ID_AD5381_5 },
+ { "ad5382-3", ID_AD5382_3 },
+ { "ad5382-5", ID_AD5382_5 },
+ { "ad5383-3", ID_AD5383_3 },
+ { "ad5383-5", ID_AD5383_5 },
+ { "ad5390-3", ID_AD5380_3 },
+ { "ad5390-5", ID_AD5380_5 },
+ { "ad5391-3", ID_AD5381_3 },
+ { "ad5391-5", ID_AD5381_5 },
+ { "ad5392-3", ID_AD5382_3 },
+ { "ad5392-5", ID_AD5382_5 },
I'm guessing you defined the ID_AD5392 etc for a reason?
Ooops, yes. Good catch.
Thanks for the review.
You are welcome.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
