Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] iio: imu: inv_icm42600: Simplify pm_runtime setup

[Jonathan Cameron]

On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 15:14:15 +0000
Sean Nyekjaer <sean@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 02:21:26PM +0100, Sean Nyekjaer wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 09, 2025 at 10:27:52PM +0100, Andy Shevchenko wrote:  
> > > On Sat, Aug 9, 2025 at 8:06 PM Jonathan Cameron <jic23@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:  
> > > > On Fri, 8 Aug 2025 23:37:51 +0200
> > > > Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:  
> > > > > On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 5:58 PM Sean Nyekjaer <sean@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:  
> > > 
> > > ...
> > >   
> > > > > > +       struct device *dev = regmap_get_device(st->map);
> > > > > >
> > > > > > +       if (!pm_runtime_status_suspended(dev))
> > > > > > +               regulator_disable(st->vddio_supply);  
> > > > >
> > > > > I would rather use positive conditional as it seems to me more scalable  
> > > >
> > > > To potentially save time when Sean looks at this.  I don't follow. Do you mean
> > > > something like
> > > >         if (pm_runtime_status_suspended(dev))
> > > >                 return;
> > > >
> > > >         regulator_disable(st->vddio_supply);
> > > >
> > > > ?  
> > > 
> > > Yes.
> > >   
> > > > If so I'm not seeing why we'd want this to scale as it's a single use
> > > > devm_set_action_or_reset() callback doing just one thing.  
> > > 
> > > While I agree in _this_ case, in general the check and return
> > > immediately is more scalable for reading purposes, e.g., indentation
> > > will be one level less. Also it won't require additional churn in
> > > adding {, i.e. changing conditional line just for that.
> > >   
> > 
> > I like the return early if pm_runtime_status_suspended() is true.
> > 
> > Andy, when doing reviews please keep the function name, as it's much
> > easier to add the changes.
> > 
> > Jonathan, do we think checking pm_runtime_status_suspended() is a viable
> > option? Should we ask on the linux-pm list?

Perhaps +CC linux-pm and Rafael on one of the patches and see if any replies.
> > 
> > If it's ok; I will patch:
> > drivers/iio/adc/ti-ads1100.c
> > drivers/iio/pressure/bmp280-core.c
> > drivers/iio/pressure/icp10100.c  
> 
> Hi Jonathan,
> 
> Did you see my question here?

Indeed not. Wise to poke!

> Just ignore this if you are vacationing...
> 
> /Sean
> 
>