On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 04:32:52PM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Nov 2023, Dmitry Rokosov wrote:
>
> > From: George Stark <gnstark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Get rid of device tree property "awinic,display-rows". The property
> > value actually means number of current switches and depends on how leds
>
> Nit: LEDs
>
> > are connected to the device. It should be calculated manually by max
> > used led number. In the same way it is computed automatically now.
>
> As above - I won't mention this again.
>
> > Max used led is taken from led definition subnodes.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: George Stark <gnstark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Dmitry Rokosov <ddrokosov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/leds/leds-aw200xx.c | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
> > 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/leds/leds-aw200xx.c b/drivers/leds/leds-aw200xx.c
> > index 7762b3a132ac..4bce5e7381c0 100644
> > --- a/drivers/leds/leds-aw200xx.c
> > +++ b/drivers/leds/leds-aw200xx.c
> > @@ -379,6 +379,30 @@ static void aw200xx_disable(const struct aw200xx *const chip)
> > return gpiod_set_value_cansleep(chip->hwen, 0);
> > }
> >
> > +static bool aw200xx_probe_get_display_rows(struct device *dev, struct aw200xx *chip)
> > +{
> > + struct fwnode_handle *child;
> > + u32 max_source = 0;
> > +
> > + device_for_each_child_node(dev, child) {
> > + u32 source;
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + ret = fwnode_property_read_u32(child, "reg", &source);
> > + if (ret || source >= chip->cdef->channels)
>
> Shouldn't the second clause fail instantly?
>
We already have such logic in the aw200xx_probe_fw() function, which
skips the LED node with the wrong reg value too. Furthermore, we have
strict reg constraints in the dt-bindings parts (in the current patch
series), so we assume that the DT developer will not create an LED with
the wrong reg value.
> > + continue;
> > +
> > + max_source = max(max_source, source);
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (!max_source)
>
> Since max_source is an integer, please use an '== 0' comparison.
>
Okay
> > + return false;
> > +
> > + chip->display_rows = max_source / chip->cdef->display_size_columns + 1;
> > +
> > + return true;
> > +}
> > +
> > static int aw200xx_probe_fw(struct device *dev, struct aw200xx *chip)
> > {
> > struct fwnode_handle *child;
> > @@ -386,18 +410,9 @@ static int aw200xx_probe_fw(struct device *dev, struct aw200xx *chip)
> > int ret;
> > int i;
> >
> > - ret = device_property_read_u32(dev, "awinic,display-rows",
> > - &chip->display_rows);
> > - if (ret)
> > - return dev_err_probe(dev, ret,
> > - "Failed to read 'display-rows' property\n");
> > -
> > - if (!chip->display_rows ||
> > - chip->display_rows > chip->cdef->display_size_rows_max) {
> > - return dev_err_probe(dev, ret,
> > - "Invalid leds display size %u\n",
> > - chip->display_rows);
> > - }
> > + if (!aw200xx_probe_get_display_rows(dev, chip))
>
> Function calls in side if() statements in general is rough.
>
> Please break it out and use 'ret' as we usually do.
>
> > + return dev_err_probe(dev, -EINVAL,
>
> Make this the return value from aw200xx_probe_get_display_rows() and use
> 'ret' instead.
>
No problem, I'll prepare a new version.
> > + "No valid led definitions found\n");
> >
> > current_max = aw200xx_imax_from_global(chip, AW200XX_IMAX_MAX_uA);
> > current_min = aw200xx_imax_from_global(chip, AW200XX_IMAX_MIN_uA);
> > --
> > 2.36.0
> >
>
> --
> Lee Jones [李琼斯]
--
Thank you,
Dmitry
