On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 1:11 PM, Eva Rachel Retuya <eraretuya@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Missed commit message is no-no!
> Signed-off-by: Eva Rachel Retuya <eraretuya@xxxxxxxxx>
> -int adxl345_core_probe(struct device *dev, struct regmap *regmap,
> - const char *name);
> +int adxl345_core_probe(struct device *dev, struct regmap *regmap, int irq,
> + const char *name, bool use_int2);
Hmm... And tomorrow you will add another flag and another.
No, consider to use something like
struct adxl345_chip {
struct device *dev;
struct regmap *regmap;
const char *name;
}
Convert your probe to use it, and after extend for your needs.
> #define ADXL345_DEVID 0xE5
>
> +#define ADXL345_IRQ_NAME "adxl345_event"
> struct adxl345_data {
> + struct iio_trigger *drdy_trig;
> struct regmap *regmap;
> + bool drdy_trig_on;
> u8 data_range;
drdy -> data_ready
> +static irqreturn_t adxl345_irq(int irq, void *p)
> +{
> + struct iio_dev *indio_dev = p;
> + struct adxl345_data *data = iio_priv(indio_dev);
> + int ret = IRQ_NONE;
> + u32 int_stat;
> +
> + ret = regmap_read(data->regmap, ADXL345_REG_INT_SOURCE, &int_stat);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + return ret;
It makes little sense AFAIU.
> +
> + if (int_stat & ADXL345_INT_DATA_READY) {
> + iio_trigger_poll(data->drdy_trig);
> + ret = IRQ_HANDLED;
> + }
> +
> + return ret;
Useless variable ret. You may return values directly.
> +}
> +
> +static int adxl345_drdy_trigger_set_state(struct iio_trigger *trig, bool state)
> +{
> + struct iio_dev *indio_dev = iio_trigger_get_drvdata(trig);
> + struct adxl345_data *data = iio_priv(indio_dev);
> + struct device *dev;
> + int ret;
> +
> + dev = regmap_get_device(data->regmap);
This may be moved to definition block.
> + ret = regmap_update_bits(data->regmap, ADXL345_REG_INT_ENABLE,
> + ADXL345_INT_DATA_READY, (state ?
> + ADXL345_INT_DATA_READY : 0));
No way:
Don't split lines like this.
Remove extra parens.
> +static const struct iio_trigger_ops adxl345_trigger_ops = {
> + .owner = THIS_MODULE,
I dunno if we still need this.
> static const struct iio_info adxl345_info = {
> .driver_module = THIS_MODULE,
Ditto.
> .read_raw = adxl345_read_raw,
> };
> + /*
> + * Any bits set to 0 send their respective interrupts to the INT1 pin,
> + * whereas bits set to 1 send their respective interrupts to the INT2
> + * pin. Map all interrupts to the specified pin.
> + */
> + if (!use_int2)
> + ret = regmap_write(data->regmap, ADXL345_REG_INT_MAP, 0x00);
> + else
> + ret = regmap_write(data->regmap, ADXL345_REG_INT_MAP, 0xFF);
I would create a temporary variable to hold the value and call
regmap_write() unconditionally.
> - return iio_device_register(indio_dev);
You are not supposed to ping-pong changes in your series. Make clear
your goal either you do like above or like below. If you choose
latter, don't alter it in previous patch.
> + if (irq > 0) {
> + ret =
> + devm_request_threaded_irq(dev, irq, NULL, adxl345_irq,
Don't split lines like this.
> + IRQF_TRIGGER_HIGH | IRQF_ONESHOT,
Are you sure you have threaded IRQ handler?
> + ret = iio_device_register(indio_dev);
> + if (ret < 0) {
> + dev_err(dev, "iio_device_register failed: %d\n", ret);
> + goto err_trigger_unregister;
> + }
> +
> + return ret;
> +err_trigger_unregister:
> + if (data->drdy_trig)
> + iio_trigger_unregister(data->drdy_trig);
> +
> + return ret;
So, doesn't devm_iio_*() provide a facility to avoid this?
> @@ -229,6 +334,8 @@ int adxl345_core_remove(struct device *dev)
> struct adxl345_data *data = iio_priv(indio_dev);
>
> iio_device_unregister(indio_dev);
> + if (data->drdy_trig)
> + iio_trigger_unregister(data->drdy_trig);
Ditto.
> --- a/drivers/iio/accel/adxl345_i2c.c
> +++ b/drivers/iio/accel/adxl345_i2c.c
> - return adxl345_core_probe(&client->dev, regmap, id ? id->name : NULL);
> + irq = of_irq_get_byname(client->dev.of_node, "INT2");
> + if (irq == client->irq)
> + use_int2 = true;
Can't you use platform_get_irq() instead?
> - return adxl345_core_probe(&spi->dev, regmap, id->name);
> + irq = of_irq_get_byname(spi->dev.of_node, "INT2");
> + if (irq == spi->irq)
> + use_int2 = true;
Ditto.
P.S. Are you doing this stuff on your own or you are working for some
company? If the latter applies, please, consider to do *internal*
review first.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
--
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
