Re: [PATCH 1/2] staging: iio: cdc: ad7746: clean up driver comments and probe return

[Fabio Aiuto]

Hi Lucas,

On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 05:54:01PM -0300, Lucas Stankus wrote:
> Remove vague comments, align temperature comment with indent block and
> simplify probe return on device register.
> 
> Also fix the following checkpatch warning:
> CHECK: Alignment should match open parenthesis
> 
> Signed-off-by: Lucas Stankus <lucas.p.stankus@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/iio/cdc/ad7746.c | 31 ++++++++++---------------------
>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/iio/cdc/ad7746.c b/drivers/staging/iio/cdc/ad7746.c
> index dfd71e99e872..e03d010b2f4c 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/iio/cdc/ad7746.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/iio/cdc/ad7746.c
> @@ -84,10 +84,6 @@
>  #define AD7746_CAPDAC_DACEN		BIT(7)
>  #define AD7746_CAPDAC_DACP(x)		((x) & 0x7F)
>  
> -/*
> - * struct ad7746_chip_info - chip specific information
> - */
> -

Comment deletions should go in a separate patch


>  struct ad7746_chip_info {
>  	struct i2c_client *client;
>  	struct mutex lock; /* protect sensor state */
> @@ -232,13 +228,14 @@ static int ad7746_select_channel(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
>  
>  		if (chip->capdac_set != chan->channel) {
>  			ret = i2c_smbus_write_byte_data(chip->client,
> -				AD7746_REG_CAPDACA,
> -				chip->capdac[chan->channel][0]);
> +							AD7746_REG_CAPDACA,
> +							chip->capdac[chan->channel][0]);
>  			if (ret < 0)
>  				return ret;
> +
>  			ret = i2c_smbus_write_byte_data(chip->client,
> -				AD7746_REG_CAPDACB,
> -				chip->capdac[chan->channel][1]);
> +							AD7746_REG_CAPDACB,
> +							chip->capdac[chan->channel][1]);
>  			if (ret < 0)
>  				return ret;

Alignments of function argument form a different logical change
and should go on a separate patch...
 
>  
> @@ -564,10 +561,10 @@ static int ad7746_read_raw(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
>  
>  		switch (chan->type) {
>  		case IIO_TEMP:
> -		/*
> -		 * temperature in milli degrees Celsius
> -		 * T = ((*val / 2048) - 4096) * 1000
> -		 */
> +			/*
> +			 * temperature in milli degrees Celsius
> +			 * T = ((*val / 2048) - 4096) * 1000
> +			 */
>  			*val = (*val * 125) / 256;
>  			break;
>  		case IIO_VOLTAGE:
> @@ -669,10 +666,6 @@ static const struct iio_info ad7746_info = {
>  	.write_raw = ad7746_write_raw,
>  };
>  
> -/*
> - * device probe and remove
> - */
> -
>  static int ad7746_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
>  			const struct i2c_device_id *id)
>  {
> @@ -730,11 +723,7 @@ static int ad7746_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
>  	if (ret < 0)
>  		return ret;
>  
> -	ret = devm_iio_device_register(indio_dev->dev.parent, indio_dev);
> -	if (ret)
> -		return ret;
> -
> -	return 0;
> +	return devm_iio_device_register(indio_dev->dev.parent, indio_dev);
>  }

this return value fix should go in a separate patch

>  
>  static const struct i2c_device_id ad7746_id[] = {
> -- 
> 2.31.1
> 
> 

so, in my opinion, this patch could be split
in three different patches.

Thank you,

fabio