Hi Jonathan,
jic23@xxxxxxxxxx wrote on Sat, 15 Jan 2022 16:06:19 +0000:
> On Thu, 16 Dec 2021 09:22:35 +0100
> Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Hi Alexandru,
> >
> > ardeleanalex@xxxxxxxxx wrote on Thu, 16 Dec 2021 08:47:02 +0200:
> >
> > > On Wed, Dec 15, 2021 at 10:03 PM Miquel Raynal
> > > <miquel.raynal@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > This is an internal variable of the core, let's use the
> > > > iio_buffer_enabled() helper which is exported for the following purpose:
> > > > telling if the current mode is a buffered mode, which is precisely what
> > > > this driver looks for.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > > drivers/iio/adc/stm32-dfsdm-adc.c | 5 ++---
> > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/iio/adc/stm32-dfsdm-adc.c b/drivers/iio/adc/stm32-dfsdm-adc.c
> > > > index 1cfefb3b5e56..a3b8827d3bbf 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/iio/adc/stm32-dfsdm-adc.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/iio/adc/stm32-dfsdm-adc.c
> > > > @@ -466,8 +466,7 @@ static int stm32_dfsdm_channels_configure(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
> > > > * In continuous mode, use fast mode configuration,
> > > > * if it provides a better resolution.
> > > > */
> > > > - if (adc->nconv == 1 && !trig &&
> > > > - (indio_dev->currentmode & INDIO_BUFFER_SOFTWARE)) {
> > > > + if (adc->nconv == 1 && !trig && iio_buffer_enabled(indio_dev)) {
> > >
> > > This may become tricky if other modes get added later.
> > > STM does a relatively good job in updating and re-using their drivers
> > > (even if some of them do look quirky sometimes).
>
> Their hardware is crazy/complicated so tends to push the limits!
>
> > >
> > > So, the question here would be: is "iio_buffer_enabled(indio_dev)"
> > > going to be valid [in this place] once INDIO_BUFFER_TRIGGERED or
> > > INDIO_BUFFER_HARDWARE get added?
> >
> > I would argue, is this a real problem? Today iio_buffer_enabled() seem
> > to handle well what this driver is expecting. If tomorrow someone adds
> > another mode, that is his/her responsibility to state "okay, this
> > section is not common to all buffer styles *anymore*, so we need to do
> > a more fine grained check against ->currentmodes than
> > iio_buffer_enabled() does". In that case using the ->currentmodes
> > getter would be the right way to go, but only at that particular
> > moment, not today.
>
> It should be isolated to this driver, so I think it is fine to use
> the broader check today, but I'll leave this to the st folks as
> it's their driver and I don't feel that strongly about it.
>
> >
> > >
> > > I'd also ping some STM people for some feedback, acks or testing.
>
> Definitely on this - they are an active bunch who do a great job of looking
> after these drivers. I've cc'd Fabrice. Make sure he (and possibly some
> others are on v2 cc list).
>
I'll add Olivier Moysan as well in the next version who has been quite
active on this driver as well according to git log.
>
> > >
> > > > if (fl->flo[1].res >= fl->flo[0].res) {
> > > > fl->fast = 1;
> > > > flo = &fl->flo[1];
> > > > @@ -562,7 +561,7 @@ static int stm32_dfsdm_filter_configure(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
> > > > cr1 = DFSDM_CR1_RCH(chan->channel);
> > > >
> > > > /* Continuous conversions triggered by SPI clk in buffer mode */
> > > > - if (indio_dev->currentmode & INDIO_BUFFER_SOFTWARE)
> > > > + if (iio_buffer_enabled(indio_dev))
> > > > cr1 |= DFSDM_CR1_RCONT(1);
> > > >
> > > > cr1 |= DFSDM_CR1_RSYNC(fl->sync_mode);
> > > > --
> > > > 2.27.0
> > > >
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Miquèl
>
Thanks,
Miquèl
