On Tue, May 20, 2025 at 10:50:03PM +0000, Lothar Rubusch wrote:
> Add FIFO watermark configuration and evaluation. Let a watermark to be
> configured. Evaluate the interrupt accordingly. Read out the FIFO content
> and push the values to the IIO channel.
...
> + const unsigned int fifo_mask = 0x1f, watermark_mask = 0x02;
Seems you have some (wrong) setting in the text editor?
One space too many again...
...
> +static int adxl313_fifo_push(struct iio_dev *indio_dev, int samples)
> +{
> + struct adxl313_data *data = iio_priv(indio_dev);
> + int i, ret;
Why is 'i' signed?
> + if (samples <= 0)
What is the semantics of the negative samples? Is it an error code? Why not?
I believe it's ignored again from my previous review.
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + ret = adxl313_fifo_transfer(data, samples);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < ADXL313_NUM_AXIS * samples; i += ADXL313_NUM_AXIS)
Ouch, one space too many, *again*!
> + iio_push_to_buffers(indio_dev, &data->fifo_buf[i]);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
...
> +static int adxl313_push_event(struct iio_dev *indio_dev, int int_stat)
> +{
> + struct adxl313_data *data = iio_priv(indio_dev);
> + int samples;
> + int ret = -ENOENT;
> +
> + if (FIELD_GET(ADXL313_INT_WATERMARK, int_stat)) {
> + samples = adxl313_get_samples(data);
> + if (samples < 0)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + ret = adxl313_fifo_push(indio_dev, samples);
> + }
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
...and again... If you are going to ignore most of the comments, do not expect
your patches to be applied. I'm stopping here.
...
Also note, try to avoid sending a new version until the review is settled down
on a previous round.
...
With this being said, I stopped here. Take your time (you have now a few weeks)
and carefully address / discuss all mentioned pieces of the code in both review
rounds.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
