Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
From:   Andrea Merello <Andrea.Merello@iit.it>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
CC:     Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@kernel.org>,
        linux-iio <linux-iio@vger.kernel.org>,
        "Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        devicetree <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
        Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>,
        "Rob Herring" <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Matt Ranostay <matt.ranostay@konsulko.com>,
        Alexandru Ardelean <ardeleanalex@gmail.com>,
        jmondi <jacopo@jmondi.org>
Subject: Re: [v6 08/14] iio: imu: add Bosch Sensortec BNO055 core driver
Thread-Topic: [v6 08/14] iio: imu: add Bosch Sensortec BNO055 core driver
Thread-Index: AQHYfx3utmV3pJ3K2U+b/YbA0CL4iq1NadiAgAExt3k=
Date:   Tue, 14 Jun 2022 09:11:24 +0000
Message-ID: <164f663acbba481a8ea8f45f185aaf83@iit.it>
References: <20220613120534.36991-1-andrea.merello@iit.it>
 <20220613120534.36991-9-andrea.merello@iit.it>,<CAHp75Vdh8kAH6540xCwzFh5uf=QMVTHC42a8pOgvkpObzjfD+w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHp75Vdh8kAH6540xCwzFh5uf=QMVTHC42a8pOgvkpObzjfD+w@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US, it-IT
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk

Few inline comments, OK for the rest.

>...
>
>> +                                /* G:   2,    4,    8,    16 */
>
>Indentation of this comment is a bit off.
>
>> +static int bno055_acc_range_vals[] =3D {1962, 3924, 7848, 15696};
>
>Perhaps split this to 4 lines and put the comment on top of the third line=
?

Not sure what you mean here, sorry. May you elaborate or provide an example=
, please?

>...
>
>> +static void bno055_debugfs_init(struct iio_dev *iio_dev)
>> +{
>> +       struct bno055_priv *priv =3D iio_priv(iio_dev);
>> +
>> +       priv->debugfs =3D debugfs_create_file("firmware_version", 0400,
>> +                                           iio_get_debugfs_dentry(iio_d=
ev),
>> +                                           priv, &bno055_fw_version_ops=
);
>
>> +       devm_add_action_or_reset(priv->dev, bno055_debugfs_remove, priv-=
>debugfs);
>
>Shouldn't we report the potential error here? It's not directly
>related to debugfs, but something which is not directly related.

The error eventually comes out from something that has nothing to do with d=
ebugs per se (i.e. the devm stuff), but it will only affect debugfs indeed.

Assuming that we don't want to make the whole driver fail in case debugfs s=
tuff fails (see last part of the comment above debugfs_create_file() implem=
entation), and given that the devm_add_action_or_reset(), should indeed "re=
set" in case of failure (i.e. we should be in a clean situation anyway), I =
would say it should be OK not to propagate the error and let things go on.

However we can add a dev_warn() to report what happened.