[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250927162533.14f3c475@jic23-huawei>
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2025 16:25:33 +0100
From: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
To: <Victor.Duicu@...rochip.com>
Cc: <dlechner@...libre.com>, <nuno.sa@...log.com>,
<linux-iio@...r.kernel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
<robh@...nel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <andy@...nel.org>,
<krzk+dt@...nel.org>, <conor+dt@...nel.org>, <Marius.Cristea@...rochip.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] iio: temperature: add support for MCP998X
On Wed, 24 Sep 2025 12:47:31 +0000
<Victor.Duicu@...rochip.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 2025-09-20 at 11:55 +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you
> > know the content is safe
> >
>
> Hi Jonathan,
>
> > On Thu, 18 Sep 2025 14:19:37 +0300
> > <victor.duicu@...rochip.com> wrote:
> >
> > > From: Victor Duicu <victor.duicu@...rochip.com>
> > >
> > > This is the driver for Microchip MCP998X/33 and MCP998XD/33D
> > > Multichannel
> > > Automotive Temperature Monitor Family.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Victor Duicu <victor.duicu@...rochip.com>
> > Hi Victor,
> >
> > Various minor comments inline.
> > Given the build warnings I didn't elect to just tidy these up whilst
> > applying.
> > Seemed like there was slightly too high a risk of me messing it up!
> > Also we have lots of time as IIO is closed for this cycle now.
> >
> > Jonathan
> >
> ...
>
> >
> >
> > > +/**
> > > + * Bit flags and their meaning
> >
> > As below. I don't think it is worth encoding these in a bitmap. Just
> > use
> > 5 bools to represent the state.
> >
> > > + * @RECD34_ENABLE: state of Resistance Error
> > > Correction(REC) on channels 3 and 4
> > > + * @RECD12_ENABLE: state of Resistance Error
> > > Correction(REC) on channels 1 and 2
> > > + * @APDD_ENABLE: state of anti-parallel diode mode
> > > + * @RUN_STATE: chip is in run state,
> > > otherwise is in standby state
> > > + * @WAIT_BEFORE_READ: whether we need to wait a
> > > delay before reading a new value
> > > + */
> > > +#define RECD34_ENABLE 0
> > > +#define RECD12_ENABLE 1
> > > +#define APDD_ENABLE 2
> > > +#define RUN_STATE 3
> > > +#define WAIT_BEFORE_READ 4
> > > +#define USE_PREVIOUS_FREQ 5
> > > +
>
> Considering that I am planning to add new features to this driver,
> I think that it would be useful to keep the flags.
Unless there are many of these I think the loss of readability vs
the likely limited extra space used by bools still makes flags a
less than ideal approach. For reasons of DMA safe buffer allocations
on many architectures there is a lot of padding in the iio_dev / iio_priv
allocation, so you can always check if it makes any difference at all
on the allocated data
>
> > > +#define MCP9982_CHAN(index, si, __address)
> > > ( \
> > Why the outer set of ()?
>
> Without the outer () compiler returns error "Macros with complex values
> should be enclosed in parentheses."
Hmm. I'd ignore that as an unhelpful warning in this case.
>
> > > + (struct iio_chan_spec)
> > > { \
> > > + .type =
> > > IIO_TEMP, \
> > > + .info_mask_separate =
> > > BIT(IIO_CHAN_INFO_RAW), \
> > > + .info_mask_shared_by_all_available =
> > > BIT(IIO_CHAN_INFO_SAMP_FREQ) | \
> > > +
> > > BIT(IIO_CHAN_INFO_LOW_PASS_FILTER_3DB_FREQUENCY),
>
> Kind Regards,
> Victor
Powered by blists - more mailing lists