On Sun, Sep 22, 2024 at 12:44:15PM +0300, Matti Vaittinen wrote: > On 9/21/24 23:07, Vasileios Amoiridis wrote: > > On Sat, Sep 21, 2024 at 12:23:39PM -0700, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote: > > > On 9/21/24 11:19, Vasileios Amoiridis wrote: > > > > The iio_validate_own_trigger() function was added in this commit [1] but it is > > > > the same with the below function called iio_trigger_validate_own_device(). The > > > > bodies of the functions can be found in [2], [3]. > > > > > > > > [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/51cd3e3e74a6addf8d333f4a109fb9c5a11086ee.1683541225.git.mazziesaccount@xxxxxxxxx/ > > > > [2]: https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.11/source/drivers/iio/industrialio-trigger.c#L732 > > > > [3]: https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.11/source/drivers/iio/industrialio-trigger.c#L752 > > > > > > The signature of the two functions are different, the order of the > > > parameters is switched. So you can't just swap them out for the > > > `validate_trigger` callback since the signature is not compatible. But maybe > > > you can update the implementation of one of the functions to calling the > > > other function. > > > > > > > Hi Lars, > > > > Hmm, I see what you mean. Still though, do you think that we could do some > > cleaning here? I can see 3 approaches: > > > > 1) One of the 2 functions calls the other internally and nothing else has > > to change. > > I would go with this. Changing the signatures to be the same would be (in > my, not always humble enough, opinion) wrong. The different order of > parameters reflects the different idea. One checks if device for trigger is > the right one, the other checks if the trigger for the device is the right > one. Thus, the order of parameters should be different. > > Calling the same implementation internally is fine with me. Maybe Jonathan > will share his opinion when recovers from all the plumbing in Vienna ;) > > Yours, > -- Matti > > -- > Matti Vaittinen > Linux kernel developer at ROHM Semiconductors > Oulu Finland > Hi Matti! Thanks for your comment! Well, I still think in my eyes is better to have one function do one thing instead of multiple. Also, I didn't think of this argument with the order of arguments, it makes sense. My experience is quite limited to how things should be in such a large project so I trust your opinion. I would still like to see what Jonathan has to say on this though, maybe he had some reasoning behind!!! Have a nice day! Cheers, Vasilis
