linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] iio: proximity: Add driver support for vcnl3020 proximity sensor

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <5cb43513906e1175801ea4e753c855623fcd11d1.camel@yadro.com>
Date:   Mon, 30 Mar 2020 23:41:15 +0300
From:   Ivan Mikhaylov <i.mikhaylov@...ro.com>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
CC:     Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
        Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@....de>,
        Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
        Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@...erw.net>,
        linux-iio <linux-iio@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] iio: proximity: Add driver support for vcnl3020
 proximity sensor

On Mon, 2020-03-30 at 22:07 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 6:27 PM Ivan Mikhaylov <i.mikhaylov@...ro.com> wrote:
> > Proximity sensor driver based on light/vcnl4000.c code.
> > For now supports only the single on-demand measurement.
> > 
> > The VCNL3020 is a fully integrated proximity sensor. Fully
> > integrated means that the infrared emitter is included in the
> > package. It has 16-bit resolution. It includes a signal
> > processing IC and features standard I2C communication
> > interface. It features an interrupt function.
> 
> Still my tag applies, but
> I have few more comments below.
> 
> ...
> 
> > +#define VCNL_DRV_NAME          "vcnl3020"
> > +#define VCNL_REGMAP_NAME       "vcnl3020_regmap"
> 
> I'm wondering why you need the second one.

For regmap initialize as name in 
static const struct regmap_config vcnl3020_regmap_config = {
       .name           = VCNL_REGMAP_NAME,

I can get rid of it from struct with name definition.

> > +       rc = device_property_read_u32(data->dev, "vishay,led-current-
> > milliamp",
> > +                                     &led_current);
> > +       if (rc == 0) {
> > +               rc = regmap_write(data->regmap, VCNL_LED_CURRENT,
> > led_current);
> > +               if (rc)
> > +                       dev_err(data->dev,
> > +                               "Error (%d) setting LED current", rc);
> > +       }
> > +
> > +       return rc;
> 
> Why not to use standard pattern, i.e.
> 
>   if (rc)
>     return rc;
>   ...
>   rc = regmap_write(...);
> 
> ?

Optional parameter. There exists a lot of ways to do it:

rc = device_property_read_u32(dev, "milliamp", &led_current);
rc = regmap_write(regmap, VCNL_LED_CURRENT, (!rc) : led_current ? 0);
or

rc = regmap_write(regmap, VCNL_LED_CURRENT, (!rc) : led_current ?
VCNL_LED_CURRENT_DEFAULT);
or even maybe make a function like get_led_current:

rc = regmap_write(regmap, VCNL_LED_CURRENT, get_led_curent(dev));
where 
static u32 get_led_current(dev) {
	u32 led_current;
	rc = device_property_read_u32(dev, "milliamp", &led_current);
	return (!rc) : led_current ? VCNL_LED_CURRENT_DEFAULT;
}
Which one would be more preferable?

> ...
> 
> > +       if (rc) {
> > +               dev_err(data->dev,
> > +                       "vcnl3020_measure() failed with error (%d)", rc);
> 
> Perhaps you keep same pattern for error messages as in previous function(s).

Sure.

> 
> > +               goto err_unlock;
> > +       }
> > +       rc = regmap_bulk_read(data->regmap, VCNL_PS_RESULT_HI, &res, 2);
> 
> sizeof(res)

Oops.