Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Mon, 29 Jul 2019 06:59:12 -0400
From:   Brian Masney <masneyb@onstation.org>
To:     Chuhong Yuan <hslester96@gmail.com>
Cc:     Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>,
        Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@gmx.de>,
        Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>,
        Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@pmeerw.net>,
        linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] iio: tsl2772: Use device-managed API
Message-ID: <20190729105912.GA2302@onstation.org>
References: <20190729100339.24054-1-hslester96@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20190729100339.24054-1-hslester96@gmail.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi Chuhong,

On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 06:03:39PM +0800, Chuhong Yuan wrote:
> Use devm_iio_device_register to simplify
> the code.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Chuhong Yuan <hslester96@gmail.com>

Thank you for the patch. The patch description doesn't match what all is
done below. This should also be broken up into multiple patches since a
patch should only do one thing. The regulator changes should be in their
own patch, and some of the devm changes may require multiple patches.
When writing your changelog, if your patch description has the word
'and', then that may be a hint that you need to break up your patch a
little bit. That's not always the case, but something to keep in mind.

A few minor comments below.

> ---
> Changes in v2:
>   - Use regulator_bulk_() to shrink driver
>     size.
>   - Utilize more devm functions to simplify
>     the code.
>   - Remove several redundant functions.
> 
>  drivers/iio/light/tsl2772.c | 116 +++++++++++-------------------------
>  1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 82 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/iio/light/tsl2772.c b/drivers/iio/light/tsl2772.c
> index 83cece921843..946537c8586f 100644
> --- a/drivers/iio/light/tsl2772.c
> +++ b/drivers/iio/light/tsl2772.c
> @@ -131,7 +131,10 @@ enum {
>  enum {
>  	TSL2772_CHIP_UNKNOWN = 0,
>  	TSL2772_CHIP_WORKING = 1,
> -	TSL2772_CHIP_SUSPENDED = 2
> +	TSL2772_CHIP_SUSPENDED = 2,
> +	TSL2772_SUPPLY_VDD = 0,
> +	TSL2772_SUPPLY_VDDIO = 1,
> +	TSL2772_NUM_SUPPLIES = 2
>  };

This is a really minor nitpick but can these either use a #define or be
placed in its own enum block?

>  
>  /* Per-device data */
> @@ -161,8 +164,7 @@ struct tsl2772_chip {
>  	struct mutex prox_mutex;
>  	struct mutex als_mutex;
>  	struct i2c_client *client;
> -	struct regulator *vdd_supply;
> -	struct regulator *vddio_supply;
> +	struct regulator_bulk_data reg[TSL2772_NUM_SUPPLIES];

Since there's other changes, maybe name this 'supplies'? I think of
'reg' as an address.

>  	u16 prox_data;
>  	struct tsl2772_als_info als_cur_info;
>  	struct tsl2772_settings settings;
> @@ -697,46 +699,7 @@ static void tsl2772_disable_regulators_action(void *_data)
>  {
>  	struct tsl2772_chip *chip = _data;
>  
> -	regulator_disable(chip->vdd_supply);
> -	regulator_disable(chip->vddio_supply);
> -}
> -
> -static int tsl2772_enable_regulator(struct tsl2772_chip *chip,
> -				    struct regulator *regulator)
> -{
> -	int ret;
> -
> -	ret = regulator_enable(regulator);
> -	if (ret < 0) {
> -		dev_err(&chip->client->dev, "Failed to enable regulator: %d\n",
> -			ret);
> -		return ret;
> -	}
> -
> -	return 0;
> -}
> -
> -static struct regulator *tsl2772_get_regulator(struct tsl2772_chip *chip,
> -					       char *name)
> -{
> -	struct regulator *regulator;
> -	int ret;
> -
> -	regulator = devm_regulator_get(&chip->client->dev, name);
> -	if (IS_ERR(regulator)) {
> -		if (PTR_ERR(regulator) != -EPROBE_DEFER)
> -			dev_err(&chip->client->dev,
> -				"Failed to get %s regulator %d\n",
> -				name, (int)PTR_ERR(regulator));
> -
> -		return regulator;
> -	}
> -
> -	ret = tsl2772_enable_regulator(chip, regulator);
> -	if (ret < 0)
> -		return ERR_PTR(ret);
> -
> -	return regulator;
> +	regulator_bulk_disable(ARRAY_SIZE(chip->reg), chip->reg);
>  }
>  
>  static int tsl2772_chip_on(struct iio_dev *indio_dev)
> @@ -860,6 +823,13 @@ static int tsl2772_chip_off(struct iio_dev *indio_dev)
>  	return tsl2772_write_control_reg(chip, 0x00);
>  }
>  
> +static void tsl2772_chip_off_action(void *data)
> +{
> +	struct iio_dev *indio_dev = data;
> +
> +	tsl2772_chip_off(indio_dev);
> +}
> +
>  /**
>   * tsl2772_invoke_change - power cycle the device to implement the user
>   *                         parameters
> @@ -1797,20 +1767,22 @@ static int tsl2772_probe(struct i2c_client *clientp,
>  	chip->client = clientp;
>  	i2c_set_clientdata(clientp, indio_dev);
>  
> -	chip->vddio_supply = tsl2772_get_regulator(chip, "vddio");
> -	if (IS_ERR(chip->vddio_supply))
> -		return PTR_ERR(chip->vddio_supply);
> +	chip->reg[TSL2772_SUPPLY_VDD].supply = "vdd";
> +	chip->reg[TSL2772_SUPPLY_VDDIO].supply = "vddio";
>  
> -	chip->vdd_supply = tsl2772_get_regulator(chip, "vdd");
> -	if (IS_ERR(chip->vdd_supply)) {
> -		regulator_disable(chip->vddio_supply);
> -		return PTR_ERR(chip->vdd_supply);
> -	}
> +	ret = devm_regulator_bulk_get(&clientp->dev, ARRAY_SIZE(chip->reg),
> +		chip->reg);
> +	if (ret < 0)
> +		return ret;

Add a dev_err like the other error paths in probe function. Users can
use the tracing subsystem to see why this failed but an error message
in dmesg is much easier for users to find. Also be sure to check for the
EPROBE_DEFER case.

Brian