Re: [PATCH v4 5/9] staging: iio: ad7780: move regulator to after GPIO init

[Ardelean, Alexandru]

On Sat, 2019-03-02 at 19:11 +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> [External]
> 
> 
> On Fri, 1 Mar 2019 07:38:45 +0000
> "Ardelean, Alexandru" <Alex.Ardelean@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 2019-02-28 at 11:25 -0300, Renato Lui Geh wrote:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > To maintain consistency between ad7780_probe and ad7780_remove
> > > orders,
> > > regulator initialization has been moved to after GPIO
> > > initializations.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Renato Lui Geh <renatogeh@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/staging/iio/adc/ad7780.c | 26 +++++++++++++-------------
> > >  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/iio/adc/ad7780.c
> > > b/drivers/staging/iio/adc/ad7780.c
> > > index ad7617a3a141..12aef0f101bc 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/staging/iio/adc/ad7780.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/staging/iio/adc/ad7780.c
> > > @@ -255,16 +255,6 @@ static int ad7780_probe(struct spi_device *spi)
> > > 
> > >         ad_sd_init(&st->sd, indio_dev, spi,
> > > &ad7780_sigma_delta_info);
> > > 
> > > -       st->reg = devm_regulator_get(&spi->dev, "avdd");
> > > -       if (IS_ERR(st->reg))
> > > -               return PTR_ERR(st->reg);
> > > -
> > > -       ret = regulator_enable(st->reg);
> > > -       if (ret) {
> > > -               dev_err(&spi->dev, "Failed to enable specified AVdd
> > > supply\n");
> > > -               return ret;
> > > -       }
> > > -
> > >         st->chip_info =
> > >                 &ad7780_chip_info_tbl[spi_get_device_id(spi)-
> > > > driver_data];
> > > 
> > > @@ -284,7 +274,7 @@ static int ad7780_probe(struct spi_device *spi)
> > >                 ret = PTR_ERR(st->powerdown_gpio);
> > >                 dev_err(&spi->dev, "Failed to request powerdown GPIO:
> > > %d\n",
> > >                         ret);
> > > -               goto error_disable_reg;
> > > +               return ret;
> > >         }
> > > 
> > >         if (st->chip_info->is_ad778x) {
> > > @@ -295,7 +285,7 @@ static int ad7780_probe(struct spi_device *spi)
> > >                         ret = PTR_ERR(st->gain_gpio);
> > >                         dev_err(&spi->dev, "Failed to request gain
> > > GPIO:
> > > %d\n",
> > >                                 ret);
> > > -                       goto error_disable_reg;
> > > +                       return ret;
> > >                 }
> > > 
> > >                 st->filter_gpio = devm_gpiod_get_optional(&spi->dev,
> > > @@ -306,10 +296,20 @@ static int ad7780_probe(struct spi_device *spi)
> > >                         dev_err(&spi->dev,
> > >                                 "Failed to request filter GPIO:
> > > %d\n",
> > >                                 ret);
> > > -                       goto error_disable_reg;
> > > +                       return ret;
> > >                 }
> > >         }
> > > 
> > > +       st->reg = devm_regulator_get(&spi->dev, "avdd");
> > > +       if (IS_ERR(st->reg))
> > > +               return PTR_ERR(st->reg);
> > > +
> > > +       ret = regulator_enable(st->reg);
> > > +       if (ret) {
> > > +               dev_err(&spi->dev, "Failed to enable specified AVdd
> > > supply\n");
> > > +               return ret;
> > > +       }
> > > +
> > 
> > I'm probably missing something, but other than the fact that this moves
> > the
> > regulator init after the GPIOs init, it doesn't change much.
> > The order of the probe & remove is more-or-less the same.
> > The GPIOs will be free'd via devm_ API/stuff.
> 
> This is another one from me.  I'm a fanatic at times when it comes
> to probe and remove orders being precise reverses.  It just makes
> review easier.  Nice to not actually have to think.
> 
> So I agree there is no 'actual' effect but it is in my view
> still worth doing.

Ack.
Let's leave it

> 
> Jonathan
> 
> > 
> > 
> > >         ret = ad_sd_setup_buffer_and_trigger(indio_dev);
> > >         if (ret)
> > >                 goto error_disable_reg;
> > > --
> > > 2.21.0
> > > 
> 
>