[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aG-v9IxJ-XAxmnyh@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2025 15:20:04 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>
To: Primoz Fiser <primoz.fiser@...ik.com>
Cc: Haibo Chen <haibo.chen@....com>, Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com>, Nuno Sa <nuno.sa@...log.com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
imx@...ts.linux.dev, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
upstream@...ts.phytec.de, andrej.picej@...ik.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] iio: adc: imx93: Make calibration parameters
configurable
On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 12:23:58PM +0200, Primoz Fiser wrote:
> On 10. 07. 25 11:22, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 09:39:04AM +0200, Primoz Fiser wrote:
...
> >> + ret = device_property_read_u32(adc->dev, "nxp,calib-avg-en", &val);
> >> + if (!ret) {
> >> + if (val != 0 && val != 1) {
> >> + dev_err(adc->dev, "invalid nxp,calib-avg-en: %d\n", val);
> >> + return -EINVAL;
> >> + }
> >> + reg = val;
> >> + mcr &= ~IMX93_ADC_MCR_AVGEN_MASK;
> >> + mcr |= FIELD_PREP(IMX93_ADC_MCR_AVGEN_MASK, reg);
> >> + }
> >
> > Please, since it's optional, do other way around.
> >
> > val = $DEFAUTL;
> > device_property_read_u32(adc->dev, "nxp,calib-avg-en", &val);
> > FIELD_MODIFY(...)
> >
> > Similar approach may be used for the other properties.
>
> OK, I guess I could implement it like you suggested to explicitly set
> the default parameter values.
>
> But in current implementation MCR values are read at the beginning of
> imx93_adc_calibration(), meaning calibration parameters are register POR
> defaults. With you suggestion, we put defaults in software rather than
> reading them from the hw directly.
I see, then you need to read, do FIELD_GET()/device_property_read()/FIELD_MODIFY().
You got the idea.
...
> > Please, factor out this to the function, so we won't see the direct IO in the
> > ->probe().
>
> Sorry I don't understand this part.
>
> What do you mean by factoring out this writel()?
>
> Do you perhaps suggest to implement function
> imx93_adc_configure_calibration() and put all our changes into it?
>
> But we are already in imx93_adc_calibration() which is separate from
> probe().
Ah, sorry for the mistakenly read the function name. Ignore this comment.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists