Re: [PATCH v3 6/8] iio: sx9324: Add Setting for internal compensation resistor

[Stephen Boyd <swboyd@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Quoting Gwendal Grignou (2022-03-25 15:08:25)
> diff --git a/drivers/iio/proximity/sx9324.c b/drivers/iio/proximity/sx9324.c
> index 3f229dffd5380..38dfdc6dc86ad 100644
> --- a/drivers/iio/proximity/sx9324.c
> +++ b/drivers/iio/proximity/sx9324.c
> @@ -875,6 +881,22 @@ sx9324_get_default_reg(struct device *dev, int idx,
>                                SX9324_REG_AFE_PH0_PIN_MASK(pin);
>                 reg_def->def = raw;
>                 break;
> +       case SX9324_REG_AFE_CTRL0:
> +               ret = device_property_read_string(dev,
> +                               "semtech,int-comp-resistor", &res);
> +               if (ret)
> +                       break;
> +               reg_def->def &= ~SX9324_REG_AFE_CTRL0_RINT_MASK;
> +               if (!strcmp(res, "lowest"))
> +                       reg_def->def |= SX9324_REG_AFE_CTRL0_RINT_LOWEST;
> +               else if (!strcmp(res, "low"))
> +                       reg_def->def |= SX9324_REG_AFE_CTRL0_RINT_LOW;
> +               else if (!strcmp(res, "high"))

Should the order of arguments be swapped? I'm wondering if I can have
'hig' in the DT property and then it will match 'high' here? I suppose
the schema validator will find that and complain first.

> +                       reg_def->def |= SX9324_REG_AFE_CTRL0_RINT_HIGH;
> +               else if (!strcmp(res, "highest"))
> +                       reg_def->def |= SX9324_REG_AFE_CTRL0_RINT_HIGHEST;
> +
> +               break;