linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7] iio: light: ltr390: Implement runtime PM support

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAE3SzaRLQZ4=8oPmehL6unR5ESAULN_p=xK-qNouUpFO16szpQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2025 21:28:09 +0530
From: Akshay Jindal <akshayaj.lkd@...il.com>
To: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>, anshulusr@...il.com, dlechner@...libre.com, 
	nuno.sa@...log.com, andy@...nel.org, shuah@...nel.org, 
	linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7] iio: light: ltr390: Implement runtime PM support

Thanks Jonathan and Andy for the support.

Regards,
Akshay.

On Sat, Sep 13, 2025 at 5:47 PM Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 10 Sep 2025 23:24:22 +0300
> Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Sep 10, 2025 at 10:12 PM Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org> wrote:
> > > On Wed, 10 Sep 2025 18:06:32 +0530
> > > Akshay Jindal <akshayaj.lkd@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > Thank you very much for your valuable feedback.
> > > > I do have a small request regarding the review process. Over the past 3–4
> > > > versions,most of the comments have been about fixing indentations and
> > > > improving code readability. I would kindly request if it would be possible
> > > > to consolidate such cosmetic comments into a single review round.
> > > >
> > > > I completely understand that incremental feedback makes sense when the code
> > > > is actively changing, but if the changes are minimal, spreading out minor
> > > > suggestions over multiple review cycles tends to unnecessarily increase the
> > > > turnaround time.
> > > >
> > > > Your support in this would help me address the comments more efficiently.
> >
> > I can't always see _all_ problems at once, I am not a robot. I will
> > try my best, though.
> >
> > ...
> >
> > > Andy, if you are fine with the explanation I'll tidy up the minor stuff
> > > whilst applying.
> >
> > Yes, I am fine, go with it, thanks!
> >
>
> Applied with this diff;
> diff --git a/drivers/iio/light/ltr390.c b/drivers/iio/light/ltr390.c
> index 2d8449aeab18..a2b804e9089a 100644
> --- a/drivers/iio/light/ltr390.c
> +++ b/drivers/iio/light/ltr390.c
> @@ -284,8 +284,8 @@ static int ltr390_do_read_raw(struct iio_dev *iio_device,
>  }
>
>  static int ltr390_read_raw(struct iio_dev *iio_device,
> -                          struct iio_chan_spec const *chan, int *val,
> -                          int *val2, long mask)
> +                          struct iio_chan_spec const *chan,
> +                          int *val, int *val2, long mask)
>  {
>         int ret;
>         struct ltr390_data *data = iio_priv(iio_device);
> @@ -749,7 +749,7 @@ static void ltr390_powerdown(void *priv)
>                         dev_err(dev, "failed to disable interrupts\n");
>
>                 data->irq_enabled = false;
> -               pm_runtime_put_autosuspend(&data->client->dev);
> +               pm_runtime_put_autosuspend(dev);
>         }
>
>         ret = regmap_clear_bits(data->regmap, LTR390_MAIN_CTRL, LTR390_SENSOR_ENABLE);
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jonathan