Re: [PATCH v2] iio: accel: bmc150: use IIO_DECLARE_BUFFER_WITH_TS

[Jonathan Cameron]

On Sun,  9 Aug 2026 11:24:42 +0530
Yash Suthar <yashsuthar983@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Replace bmc150_accel_data plain buffer with IIO_DECLARE_BUFFER_WITH_TS()
> that also keep timestamp aligned.
> 
> Fixes: bd7fe5b71918 ("iio: accel: BMC150 accel support")
> Signed-off-by: Yash Suthar <yashsuthar983@xxxxxxxxx>

For future reference, please never reply to an existing thread with 
a new version of a patch.  I'm a bit confused why this one keeps
coming up as I'm not aware of any part of the kernel that requests
doing it this way.  Reasons not to do this:
1) Confusing threads once they get sufficient numbers of replies, including
   making it harder for tooling to work out what is going on.
2) Reviewers and maintainers tend to use mail clients that put replies
   to old threads, somewhere back in history, so the chances of getting
   a review is reduced.

Anyhow, don't resend existing patches to 'fix this' but make sure
to do new threads, if you send out any new versions.

This looks fine to me so applied to the fixes-togreg branch of iio.git
Note that branch will be rebased on rc1 once it is available.

Thanks,

Jonathan



> ---
> v2:
> - Rewrap commit message.
> - Add Fixes tag.
> 
>  drivers/iio/accel/bmc150-accel.h | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/iio/accel/bmc150-accel.h b/drivers/iio/accel/bmc150-accel.h
> index e8f26198359f..e0773533efeb 100644
> --- a/drivers/iio/accel/bmc150-accel.h
> +++ b/drivers/iio/accel/bmc150-accel.h
> @@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ struct bmc150_accel_data {
>  	struct bmc150_accel_trigger triggers[BMC150_ACCEL_TRIGGERS];
>  	struct mutex mutex;
>  	u8 fifo_mode, watermark;
> -	s16 buffer[8];
> +	IIO_DECLARE_BUFFER_WITH_TS(s16, buffer, 3);
>  	/*
>  	 * Ensure there is sufficient space and correct alignment for
>  	 * the timestamp if enabled