[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <68a25946-247d-4351-b847-35605220b16f@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2024 18:17:38 +0100
From: "Ceclan, Dumitru" <mitrutzceclan@...il.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
dumitru.ceclan@...log.com
Cc: Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
Michael Hennerich <Michael.Hennerich@...log.com>,
Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com>,
linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 9/9] iio: adc: ad7173: Add support for AD411x devices
On 13/07/2024 11:12, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 07/06/2024 16:53, Dumitru Ceclan via B4 Relay wrote:
>> From: Dumitru Ceclan <dumitru.ceclan@...log.com>
>>
>> Add support for AD4111/AD4112/AD4114/AD4115/AD4116.
>>
>> The AD411X family encompasses a series of low power, low noise, 24-bit,
>> sigma-delta analog-to-digital converters that offer a versatile range of
>> specifications.
>>
>> This family of ADCs integrates an analog front end suitable for processing
>> both fully differential and single-ended, bipolar voltage inputs
>> addressing a wide array of industrial and instrumentation requirements.
>>
>> - All ADCs have inputs with a precision voltage divider with a division
>> ratio of 10.
>> - AD4116 has 5 low level inputs without a voltage divider.
>> - AD4111 and AD4112 support current inputs (0 mA to 20 mA) using a 50ohm
>> shunt resistor.
>
> Please run scripts/checkpatch.pl and fix reported warnings. Then please
> run `scripts/checkpatch.pl --strict` and (probably) fix more warnings.
> Some warnings can be ignored, especially from --strict run, but the code
> here looks like it needs a fix. Feel free to get in touch if the warning
> is not clear.
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>
I do not get any warnings, only checks
If you meant the checks:
- for the alignment check, i would only argue for struct_group(config_props that looks good
- for unnecessary parentheses the compiler warning appears without the parentheses:
warning: suggest parentheses around comparison in operand of ‘!=’ [-Wparentheses]
Powered by blists - more mailing lists