Hi Julien
Thank you for your patch, and sorry for the late reply.
I tested it, and it works great.
On 1/12/24 10:52, Julien Massot wrote:
[...]
> @@ -1623,37 +1536,33 @@ static int vgxy61_configure(struct vgxy61_dev *sensor)
> static int vgxy61_patch(struct vgxy61_dev *sensor)
> {
> struct i2c_client *client = sensor->i2c_client;
> - int patch, ret;
> + u64 patch;
> + int ret;
>
> ret = vgxy61_write_array(sensor, VGXY61_REG_FWPATCH_START_ADDR,
> sizeof(patch_array), patch_array);
> - if (ret)
> - return ret;
> -
> - ret = vgxy61_write_reg(sensor, VGXY61_REG_STBY, 0x10, NULL);
> + cci_write(sensor->regmap, VGXY61_REG_STBY, 0x10, &ret);
> if (ret)
> return ret;
>
> ret = vgxy61_poll_reg(sensor, VGXY61_REG_STBY, 0, VGXY61_TIMEOUT_MS);
> - if (ret)
> + cci_read(sensor->regmap, VGXY61_REG_FWPATCH_REVISION, &patch, &ret);
> + if (ret < 0)
> return ret;
>
> - patch = vgxy61_read_reg(sensor, VGXY61_REG_FWPATCH_REVISION);
> - if (patch < 0)
> - return patch;
> -
> if (patch != (VGXY61_FWPATCH_REVISION_MAJOR << 12) +
> (VGXY61_FWPATCH_REVISION_MINOR << 8) +
> VGXY61_FWPATCH_REVISION_MICRO) {
> - dev_err(&client->dev, "bad patch version expected %d.%d.%d got %d.%d.%d\n",
> + dev_err(&client->dev,
> + "bad patch version expected %d.%d.%d got %u.%u.%u\n",
> VGXY61_FWPATCH_REVISION_MAJOR,
> VGXY61_FWPATCH_REVISION_MINOR,
> VGXY61_FWPATCH_REVISION_MICRO,
> - patch >> 12, (patch >> 8) & 0x0f, patch & 0xff);
> + (u16)patch >> 12, ((u16)patch >> 8) & 0x0f, (u16)patch & 0xff);
Checkpatch is complaining about this line being 87 characters long
instead of 80.
Could a maintainer apply with correct line wrap ? Thank you.
With that fixed :
Reviewed-by: Benjamin Mugnier <benjamin.mugnier@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> return -ENODEV;
> }
> - dev_dbg(&client->dev, "patch %d.%d.%d applied\n",
> - patch >> 12, (patch >> 8) & 0x0f, patch & 0xff);
> + dev_dbg(&client->dev, "patch %u.%u.%u applied\n",
> + (u16)patch >> 12, ((u16)patch >> 8) & 0x0f, (u16)patch & 0xff);
>
> return 0;
> }
[...]
--
Regards,
Benjamin
