[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9c53e05a-294a-c2d1-8808-605b10c964a9@metafoo.de>
Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2020 11:12:48 +0100
From: Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>
To: Yuehaibing <yuehaibing@...wei.com>,
Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
"Ardelean, Alexandru" <alexandru.Ardelean@...log.com>
Cc: "stefan.popa@...log.com" <stefan.popa@...log.com>,
"Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com" <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>,
"pmeerw@...erw.net" <pmeerw@...erw.net>,
"knaack.h@....de" <knaack.h@....de>,
"Hennerich, Michael" <Michael.Hennerich@...log.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-iio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-iio@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] iio:ad7797: Use correct attribute_group
On 3/9/20 2:38 AM, Yuehaibing wrote:
> On 2020/3/7 21:10, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>> On Wed, 4 Mar 2020 06:35:28 +0000
>> "Ardelean, Alexandru" <alexandru.Ardelean@...log.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 2020-03-02 at 21:32 +0800, YueHaibing wrote:
>>>> [External]
>>>>
>>>> It seems ad7797_attribute_group should be used in ad7797_info,
>>>> according to commit ("iio:ad7793: Add support for the ad7796 and ad7797").
>>> While the change looks good at first, I am thinking that this might introduce
>>> another issue while fixing this one.
>>>
>>> It looks like the ad7797_attributes[] array may also require the
>>> &iio_dev_attr_in_m_in_scale_available.dev_attr.attr attribute as well.
>>> It looks like the available scales should be printed for AD7997 as well.
>>>
>>> That being said, this patch is fine as-is.
>>> But it would require a patch [before-this-patch] to fix the ad7797_attributes
>>> array.
>>>
>>> Something like this:
>>>
>>> static struct attribute *ad7797_attributes[] = {
>>> &iio_const_attr_sampling_frequency_available_ad7797.dev_attr.attr,
>>> + &iio_dev_attr_in_m_in_scale_available.dev_attr.attr,
>>> NULL
>>> };
>>>
>>> I'm hoping I'm right about this one. I sometimes don't notice things too well.
>> Agreed. Should have that addition as well. If not we'll successfully fix
>> one issue but drop a valid interface at the same time...
>>
> Ok, will send v2 with this addtion, thanks!
>
I believe the original patch is OK the way it was. The part does not
have a programmable gain, hence should not have the scale_available
attribute.
You can add my reviewed by to the original patch.
Reviewed-by: Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>
- Lars
Powered by blists - more mailing lists