> On 1 Apr 2023, at 16.04, Jonathan Cameron <jic23@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 30 Mar 2023 17:30:32 +0200
> Fabrice Gasnier <fabrice.gasnier@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> On 3/27/23 10:34, Sean Nyekjaer wrote:
>>> Since nearly all stm32 dt's are using the legacy adc channel config,
>>> we should warn users about using it.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Sean Nyekjaer <sean@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/iio/adc/stm32-adc.c | 2 ++
>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/iio/adc/stm32-adc.c b/drivers/iio/adc/stm32-adc.c
>>> index 1aadb2ad2cab..d8e755d0cc52 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/iio/adc/stm32-adc.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/iio/adc/stm32-adc.c
>>> @@ -1993,6 +1993,8 @@ static int stm32_adc_get_legacy_chan_count(struct iio_dev *indio_dev, struct stm
>>> const struct stm32_adc_info *adc_info = adc->cfg->adc_info;
>>> int num_channels = 0, ret;
>>>
>>> + dev_warn(&indio_dev->dev, "using legacy channel config\n");
>>> +
>>
>> Hi Sean,
>>
>> I'd recommend to avoid adding a dev_warn() on a per driver basis, for
>> depreacted DT properties. Still I'm not sure if there's some policy in
>> this area.
>>
>> IMHO, deprecated properties should be checked by using dt tools
>> (dt_binding_check / dtbs_check or other mean?). But I have no idea if
>> this is going to report warnings and when. Purpose would be to avoid
>> introducing no dts files with these. As commented by Olivier on Patch 3,
>> we've some downstream patches to adopt the generic bindings (not
>> upstream 'yet').
>>
>> Another downside is regarding backward compatibility. In case an old dtb
>> is used to boot the kernel, as long as there's no functionality loss,
>> I'd advise not to use any warning here. That's a valid use of an old dt.
>>
>> In all case, thanks for pointing issues (e.g. Patch 2 & 3), regarding
>> this patch, I'd nack adding this warning. Please drop this change if you
>> re-submit or turn this into a dev_dbg().
>>
>
> Agreed. Better to change to dev_dbg().
>
> Other two patches look good to me, but will leave a bit more time for others
> to comment before I pick them up. As a small side note. They are fixes and
> this first patch is not, so they should have been before it in the series
> so I can route them to mainline faster than the non fix.
>
> Jonathan
Hi Jonathan,
I’ll resubmit the first patch with dev_dbg() as a single commit, and then the fixes as a separate series :)
/Sean
>
>> Best Regards,
>> Fabrice
>>
>>> ret = device_property_count_u32(dev, "st,adc-channels");
>>> if (ret > adc_info->max_channels) {
>>> dev_err(&indio_dev->dev, "Bad st,adc-channels?\n");
