RE: [PATCH v2 2/3] iio: pressure: bmp280: Use i2c_get_match_data

[Biju Das]

Hi Angel Iglesias,

> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] iio: pressure: bmp280: Use i2c_get_match_data
> 
> On Mon, 2023-08-28 at 12:39 +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > On Mon, 14 Aug 2023 18:43:49 +0200
> > Angel Iglesias <ang.iglesiasg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 2023-08-14 at 06:57 +0000, Biju Das wrote:
> > > > Hi Angel Iglesias,
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] iio: pressure: bmp280: Use
> > > > > i2c_get_match_data
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sun, 2023-08-13 at 21:03 +0200, Angel Iglesias wrote:
> > > > > > Replaces device_get_match_data() and fallback match_id logic
> > > > > > by new unified helper function i2c_get_match_data().
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Angel Iglesias <ang.iglesiasg@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/iio/pressure/bmp280-i2c.c
> > > > > > b/drivers/iio/pressure/bmp280- i2c.c index
> > > > > > 693eb1975fdc..34e3bc758493
> > > > > > 100644
> > > > > > --- a/drivers/iio/pressure/bmp280-i2c.c
> > > > > > +++ b/drivers/iio/pressure/bmp280-i2c.c
> > > > > > @@ -11,9 +11,7 @@ static int bmp280_i2c_probe(struct
> > > > > > i2c_client
> > > > > > *client)
> > > > > >         const struct bmp280_chip_info *chip_info;
> > > > > >         struct regmap *regmap;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -       chip_info = device_get_match_data(&client->dev);
> > > > > > -       if (!chip_info)
> > > > > > -               chip_info = (const struct bmp280_chip_info *)
> > > > > > id->driver_data;
> > > > > > +       chip_info = i2c_get_match_data(client);
> > > > > >
> > > > > >         regmap = devm_regmap_init_i2c(client,
> > > > > > chip_info->regmap_config);
> > > > > >         if (IS_ERR(regmap)) {
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > I noticed I submitted this change that was also submitted by
> > > > > Biju Das on another
> > > > > patch:
> > > >
> > > > > Should I drop this patch from the series?
> > > >
> > > > I think it is ok. Andy is suggesting to use unified table for
> > > > SPI/I2C
> > > >
> > > > Is it something do able and testable in your environment? see [1],
> > > > If yes, please create another patch for using unified table for
> > > > both i2c and spi.
> > >
> > > I have around a BMP390 with the SPI pins available to test it out.
> > > In the case of the bmp280 we could unify the of_match table as
> > > they're almost the same.
> > > In
> > > the case of the spi_device_id and i2c_device_id tables, as they're
> > > different structs I'm not sure if they can be unified.
> > >
> > > Regarding Andy's comment, I think he's referring to the duplicated
> > > chip infos.
> > > In the case of the bmp280, the chip_infos are defined on the common
> > > driver code and used for both SPI and I2C match tables.
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm loosing track of where we are with this driver as multiple people
> > are working on it.
> >
> > Angel, as most of the work is yours, please could you manage the flow
> > of patches for this one so I get series with clear statement of what
> > they are dependent on.
> 
> Sure. If Biju is okay with it, maybe I should squash toghether this two
> series of mine:

I am ok with it, as I don't have bandwidth as well as board for testing it. Please feel free to post.

Cheers,
Biju