Re: [PATCH 2/4] iio: frequency: adf4377: add support for ADF4377

[Jonathan Cameron]

On Fri, 04 Nov 2022 12:38:07 +0100
Nuno Sá <noname.nuno@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Fri, 2022-11-04 at 11:28 +0200, Antoniu Miclaus wrote:
> > The ADF4377 is a high performance, ultralow jitter, dual output
> > integer-N
> > phased locked loop (PLL) with integrated voltage controlled
> > oscillator
> > (VCO) ideally suited for data converter and mixed signal front end
> > (MxFE)
> > clock applications.
> > 
> > Datasheet:
> > https://www.analog.com/media/en/technical-documentation/data-sheets/adf4377.pdf
> > Signed-off-by: Antoniu Miclaus <antoniu.miclaus@xxxxxxxxxx>

Nuno, please crop to the bit you comment on.  Doom scrolling isn't fun ;)

A few follow up comments inline.

Jonathan

> > ---
> >  drivers/iio/frequency/Kconfig   |   10 +
> >  drivers/iio/frequency/Makefile  |    1 +
> >  drivers/iio/frequency/adf4377.c | 1154

...
> > +static ssize_t adf4377_read(struct iio_dev *indio_dev, uintptr_t
> > private,
> > +                           const struct iio_chan_spec *chan, char
> > *buf)
> > +{
> > +       struct adf4377_state *st = iio_priv(indio_dev);
> > +       u64 val = 0;
> > +       int ret;
> > +
> > +       switch ((u32)private) {
> > +       case ADF4377_FREQ:
> > +               ret = adf4377_get_freq(st, &val);
> > +               break;
> > +       default:
> > +               ret = -EINVAL;
> > +               val = 0;
> > +               break;
> > +       }
> > +
> > +       return ret ?: sysfs_emit(buf, "%llu\n", val);  
> 
> I would also return in place. I've come to prefer it but that's me :)

Definitely if alternative is a ternary!


> > +       return ret ? : FIELD_GET(ADF4377_MUXOUT_MSK, mode);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static const struct iio_enum adf4377_muxout_enum = {
> > +       .items = adf4377_muxout_modes,
> > +       .num_items = ARRAY_SIZE(adf4377_muxout_modes),
> > +       .get = adf4377_get_muxout_mode,
> > +       .set = adf4377_set_muxout_mode,
> > +};
> > +
> > +#define _ADF4377_EXT_INFO(_name, _shared, _ident) { \
> > +               .name = _name, \
> > +               .read = adf4377_read, \
> > +               .write = adf4377_write, \
> > +               .private = _ident, \
> > +               .shared = _shared, \
> > +       }
> > +
> > +static const struct iio_chan_spec_ext_info adf4377_ext_info[] = {
> > +       /*
> > +        * Usually we use IIO_CHAN_INFO_FREQUENCY, but there are
> > +        * values > 2^32 in order to support the entire frequency
> > range
> > +        * in Hz.
> > +        */
> > +       _ADF4377_EXT_INFO("frequency", IIO_SHARED_BY_ALL,
> > ADF4377_FREQ),  
> 
> Can't we have u64 already in IIO_CHAN_INFO_FREQUENCY? I know the write
> side is a bit awkward but I think we can make it better.

hmm. I think we only have s64. If 63 bits is enough then we are good to go :)

(in the annals of bad design decisions, thinking years ago that no one would
 go beyond 32 bits... oops).

>  
> > +       IIO_ENUM("muxout_select", IIO_SHARED_BY_ALL,
> > &adf4377_muxout_enum),
> > +       IIO_ENUM_AVAILABLE("muxout_select", IIO_SHARED_BY_ALL,
> > &adf4377_muxout_enum),
> > +       { },
> > +};
> > +

...

> > +
> > +static int adf4377_probe(struct spi_device *spi)
> > +{
> > +       struct iio_dev *indio_dev;
> > +       struct regmap *regmap;
> > +       struct adf4377_state *st;
> > +       int ret;
> > +
> > +       indio_dev = devm_iio_device_alloc(&spi->dev, sizeof(*st));
> > +       if (!indio_dev)
> > +               return -ENOMEM;
> > +
> > +       regmap = devm_regmap_init_spi(spi, &adf4377_regmap_config);
> > +       if (IS_ERR(regmap))
> > +               return PTR_ERR(regmap);
> > +
> > +       st = iio_priv(indio_dev);
> > +
> > +       indio_dev->info = &adf4377_info;
> > +       indio_dev->name = "adf4377";
> > +       indio_dev->channels = adf4377_channels;
> > +       indio_dev->num_channels = ARRAY_SIZE(adf4377_channels);
> > +
> > +       st->regmap = regmap;
> > +       st->spi = spi;
> > +       st->type = spi_get_device_id(spi)->driver_data;  
> 
> Hmm this is something that came up internally the other day. Are we
> guaranteed that this will always work? For OF I think it is but I'm not
> sure about ACPI? At first glance, it seems that it might be ok but I
> did not went too deep in the ACPI code.

Better indeed to not assume it and indeed ACPI can't do this magic, because
there isn't a match between the actual ACPI ID and the spi_device_ids.
Not sure what it does with PRP0001 case (where it uses the of_device_id table).


	st->type = device_get_match_id()->driver_data;
	if (!st->type) {
		const struct spi_device_id *id = spi_get_device_id(spi);

		if (!id)
			return -EINVAL;

		st->type = spi_get_device_id(spi)->driver_data;
	}
would be my preferred pattern. Andy had a suggestion to roll this
up in a standard function, but not gone anywhere yet.

> 

Jonathan