Re: [PATCH 1/2] iio: dac: dac8163: Add driver for DAC8163

[David Lechner]

On 6/24/26 9:47 AM, Lukas wrote:
> Thanks a lot for all the comments.
> 
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2026 at 10:39:23PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> 
>>> +		dev_dbg(dev, "%s: val=%d val2=%d\n", __func__, val, val2);

Trimming down the reply is good, but in this case, it would have been
helpful to leave a bit more context. I usually keep the full function
in a reply to have enough context if it isn't too long.

>>
>> No. Is it RFC? PoC? Or production-ready? If not the latter, come when it will
>> be production-ready.
>>
> 
> I will remove the debug print. I tried my best to make this driver production-ready.
> I saw that other drivers also have similar debug messages so i didnt

This one jumped out to both of us as odd because of the __func__ and the
fact that it is in a very common operation (raw write). Usually debug is
for catching odd things that happen, not normal things.

> remove it after my first tests and thought it is ok to leave it in
> there. My intention was to try to apply the suggestions and comments i
> get and send a second revision. Do you think thats the right way?

Yes, you are doing it right. For a new driver like this, it is best
to wait about a week before submitting the next revision to give ample
time for review. Your replies so far where you think a suggestion was
wrong or have asked for clarification are spot on as to what we expect
for the review process.