Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-73170-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.80.249 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.80.249;
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2024 16:19:25 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy@kernel.org>
To: Nuno =?iso-8859-1?Q?S=E1?= <noname.nuno@gmail.com>
Cc: Dumitru Ceclan <mitrutzceclan@gmail.com>, linus.walleij@linaro.org,
	brgl@bgdev.pl, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org,
	Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>,
	Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
	Michael Walle <michael@walle.cc>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	ChiaEn Wu <chiaen_wu@richtek.com>,
	Niklas Schnelle <schnelle@linux.ibm.com>,
	Leonard =?iso-8859-1?Q?G=F6hrs?= <l.goehrs@pengutronix.de>,
	Mike Looijmans <mike.looijmans@topic.nl>,
	Haibo Chen <haibo.chen@nxp.com>,
	Hugo Villeneuve <hvilleneuve@dimonoff.com>,
	David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com>,
	Ceclan Dumitru <dumitru.ceclan@analog.com>,
	linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 3/3] iio: adc: ad7173: add AD7173 driver
Message-ID: <ZdS07T5jJ_pCzRFK@smile.fi.intel.com>
References: <20240220094344.17556-1-mitrutzceclan@gmail.com>
 <20240220094344.17556-3-mitrutzceclan@gmail.com>
 <fc49f36bf1df931f7c67dd195aa74636eb479e64.camel@gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <fc49f36bf1df931f7c67dd195aa74636eb479e64.camel@gmail.com>
Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo

On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 01:20:52PM +0100, Nuno S? wrote:
> On Tue, 2024-02-20 at 11:43 +0200, Dumitru Ceclan wrote:

..

> Another thing that caught my attention

> > +static int ad7173_register_clk_provider(struct iio_dev *indio_dev)
> > +{
> > +	struct ad7173_state *st = iio_priv(indio_dev);
> > +	struct device *dev = indio_dev->dev.parent;
> > +	struct fwnode_handle *fw_node = dev_fwnode(dev);

Since you used this context, I would also like fw_node to be renamed to fwnode
(in case it will still be used).

> > +	struct clk_init_data init = {};
> > +	int ret;
> > +
> > +	if (!fw_node)
> > +		return 0;
> 
> I think that better than the above check (do we really have any case where fw_node is
> NULL?) is to have:
> 
> if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK))
> 	return 0;

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko