Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/2] Input: touchscreen-iproc: Add Broadcom iProc touchscreen driver | From | Joe Perches <> | Date | Wed, 17 Dec 2014 18:14:41 -0800 |
| |
On Wed, 2014-12-17 at 17:59 -0800, Jonathan Richardson wrote: > Add initial version of the Broadcom touchscreen driver.
trivia:
> diff --git a/drivers/input/touchscreen/bcm_iproc_tsc.c b/drivers/input/touchscreen/bcm_iproc_tsc.c
> +/* Bit values for REGCTL2 */ > +#define TS_CONTROLLER_EN_BIT (1 << 16) > +#define TS_CONTROLLER_AVGDATA_SHIFT 8 > +#define TS_CONTROLLER_AVGDATA_MASK (0x7 << TS_CONTROLLER_AVGDATA_SHIFT) > +#define TS_CONTROLLER_PWR_LDO (1<<5) > +#define TS_CONTROLLER_PWR_ADC (1<<4) > +#define TS_CONTROLLER_PWR_BGP (1<<3) > +#define TS_CONTROLLER_PWR_TS (1<<2) > +#define TS_WIRE_MODE_BIT (1<<1)
Be nicer to use the same spacing around << or maybe use the BIT macro.
[]
> +static int get_tsc_config(struct device_node *np, struct iproc_ts_priv *priv) > +{ > + int ret; > + u32 val; > + struct device *dev = &priv->pdev->dev; > + > + priv->cfg_params = default_config; > + > + ret = of_property_read_u32(np, "scanning_period", &val); > + if (ret >= 0) { > + if ((1 <= val) && (val <= 256)) > + priv->cfg_params.scanning_period = val; > + else { > + dev_err(dev, "scanning_period must be [1-256]"); > + return -EINVAL; > + }
ret is never used so I'd probably remove it from all these blocks.
It's probably be nicer to invert the logic ald remove the else.
There's a missing terminating newline too.
Something like:
if (of_property_read_u32(np, "scanning_period", &val) >= 0) { if (val < 1 || val > 256) { dev_err(dev, "scanning_period must be [1-256]\n"); return -EINVAL; } priv->cfg_params.scanning_period = val; }
etc...
| |