On Thu, Jan 06, 2022 at 10:31:10PM +1300, Paulo Miguel Almeida wrote: > As a convention for the pi433 driver, all routines that deals with the > rf69 chip are defined in the rf69.c file. There was an exception in > which the uC version verification was being done directly elsewhere. > While at it, the Version Register hardcoded value was replaced with a > pre-existing constant in the driver. > > This patch adds rf69_get_chip_version function to rf69.c > > Additionally, the patch below must be applied first as it was sent > before and touches the same file. > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220103222334.GA6814@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > Signed-off-by: Paulo Miguel Almeida <paulo.miguel.almeida.rodenas@xxxxxxxxx> Hi, Paulo. Thanks for a patch. I think it's good overall. But I have some opinion below. > --- > drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c | 4 +--- > drivers/staging/pi433/rf69.c | 8 ++++++++ > drivers/staging/pi433/rf69.h | 1 + > 3 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c b/drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c > index 29bd37669059..a19afda5b188 100644 > --- a/drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c > +++ b/drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c > @@ -1116,9 +1116,7 @@ static int pi433_probe(struct spi_device *spi) > spi->mode, spi->bits_per_word, spi->max_speed_hz); > > /* Ping the chip by reading the version register */ > - retval = spi_w8r8(spi, 0x10); > - if (retval < 0) > - return retval; > + retval = rf69_get_chip_version(spi); > > switch (retval) { > case 0x24: > diff --git a/drivers/staging/pi433/rf69.c b/drivers/staging/pi433/rf69.c > index d64df072d8e8..1516012f9bb7 100644 > --- a/drivers/staging/pi433/rf69.c > +++ b/drivers/staging/pi433/rf69.c > @@ -102,6 +102,14 @@ static inline int rf69_read_mod_write(struct spi_device *spi, u8 reg, > > /*-------------------------------------------------------------------------*/ > > +int rf69_get_chip_version(struct spi_device *spi) > +{ > + int retval; > + > + retval = rf69_read_reg(spi, REG_VERSION); > + return retval; > +} > + If we don't modify retval, why don't we just return directly without retval? > int rf69_set_mode(struct spi_device *spi, enum mode mode) > { > static const u8 mode_map[] = { > diff --git a/drivers/staging/pi433/rf69.h b/drivers/staging/pi433/rf69.h > index b648ba5fff89..ca9b75267840 100644 > --- a/drivers/staging/pi433/rf69.h > +++ b/drivers/staging/pi433/rf69.h > @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@ > #define FIFO_SIZE 66 /* bytes */ > #define FIFO_THRESHOLD 15 /* bytes */ > > +int rf69_get_chip_version(struct spi_device *spi); IMHO, I think that we don't need to include 'chip'. Because all other functions in this code don't have 'chip' in function name. and version code seems to be more accurate representation. > int rf69_set_mode(struct spi_device *spi, enum mode mode); > int rf69_set_data_mode(struct spi_device *spi, u8 data_mode); > int rf69_set_modulation(struct spi_device *spi, enum modulation modulation); > -- > 2.25.4 >
