lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Jan]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v6 7/8] media: i2c: add DS90UB913 driver
On Sun, Jan 08, 2023 at 06:06:34AM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 05, 2023 at 04:03:06PM +0200, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:

...

> > + scnprintf(priv->gpio_chip_name, sizeof(priv->gpio_chip_name), "%s",
> > + dev_name(dev));
>
> I think you can use strscpy().

Actually I'm not sure we even need that variable. What is the lifetime of
the dev and gc? I believe they are the same or gc's one is shorter, hence
dev_name() can be used directly, no?

...

> > + gc->of_node = priv->client->dev.of_node;

We don't have of_node anymore in gc. And if the parent device is set, you can
drop this line (it will work with older and newer kernels. Otherwise, use
fwnode.

...

> > + ret = gpiochip_add_data(gc, priv);
> > + if (ret) {
> > + dev_err(dev, "Failed to add GPIOs: %d\n", ret);

> > + return ret;
> > + }
> > +
> > + return 0;

return ret;

...

> > + ep_node = of_graph_get_endpoint_by_regs(dev->of_node, 0, 0);

Why this can't be fwnode_handle from day 1?

> > + if (!ep_node) {
> > + dev_err(dev, "No graph endpoint\n");
> > + return -ENODEV;
> > + }

...

> > + ep_np = of_graph_get_endpoint_by_regs(np, 0, 0);
> > + if (!ep_np) {
> > + dev_err(dev, "OF: no endpoint\n");
> > + return -ENOENT;
> > + }

Ditto.

> > + ret = of_property_read_u32(ep_np, "pclk-sample", &priv->pclk_polarity);
> > +
> > + of_node_put(ep_np);

Ditto.

...

> > + return ret;
> > + }
> > +
> > + return 0;

return ret;

...

> > + priv->plat_data = dev_get_platdata(&client->dev);
> > + if (!priv->plat_data) {
> > + dev_err(dev, "Platform data missing\n");
> > + return -ENODEV;

return dev_err_probe(...); ?

> > + }

...

> > + priv->regmap = devm_regmap_init_i2c(client, &ub913_regmap_config);
> > + if (IS_ERR(priv->regmap)) {
> > + dev_err(dev, "Failed to init regmap\n");
> > + return PTR_ERR(priv->regmap);

Ditto?

> > + }

...

> > +#ifdef CONFIG_OF
>
> The driver depends on CONFIG_OF so I would drop this, as well as the
> of_match_ptr().

Even if there is no OF dependency, these ugly ifdeffery with of_match_ptr()
are error prone (compilation wise).

...

> > +static const struct of_device_id ub913_dt_ids[] = {
> > + { .compatible = "ti,ds90ub913a-q1", },

Inner comma is not needed.

> > + {}
> > +};

...

> > +static struct i2c_driver ds90ub913_driver = {
> > + .probe_new = ub913_probe,
> > + .remove = ub913_remove,
> > + .id_table = ub913_id,
> > + .driver = {
> > + .name = "ds90ub913a",

> > + .owner = THIS_MODULE,

This is something like for 5+ years is not needed, as the below macro sets it
for you.

> > + .of_match_table = of_match_ptr(ub913_dt_ids),
> > + },
> > +};

> > +

Redundant blank line.

> > +module_i2c_driver(ds90ub913_driver);

--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-03-26 23:32    [W:0.078 / U:0.424 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site