On Mon, May 12, 2025 at 09:30:39AM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
Sorry for the late reply, I missed mails for this series.
> On 2025-05-12 15:11:56+0800, Sung-Chi Li via B4 Relay wrote:
> > From: Sung-Chi Li <lschyi@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > static int cros_ec_hwmon_read_temp(struct cros_ec_device *cros_ec, u8 index, u8 *temp)
> > {
> > unsigned int offset;
> > @@ -73,7 +117,9 @@ static long cros_ec_hwmon_temp_to_millicelsius(u8 temp)
> > static int cros_ec_hwmon_read(struct device *dev, enum hwmon_sensor_types type,
> > u32 attr, int channel, long *val)
> > {
> > + u8 control_method;
> > struct cros_ec_hwmon_priv *priv = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
> > + u8 pwm_value;
> > int ret = -EOPNOTSUPP;
> > u16 speed;
> > u8 temp;
>
> Ordering again.
>
> This should be:
>
> struct cros_ec_hwmon_priv *priv = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
> int ret = -EOPNOTSUPP;
> u8 control_method;
> u8 pwm_value;
> u16 speed;
> u8 temp;
>
> or:
>
> struct cros_ec_hwmon_priv *priv = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
> u8 control_method, pwm_value, temp;
> int ret = -EOPNOTSUPP;
> u16 speed;
>
> <snip>
>
Would you mind to share the sorting logic, so I do not bother you with checking
these styling issue? Initially, I thought the sorting is based on the variable
name, but after seeing your example (which I am appreciated), I am not sure how
the sorting works. Is it sorted along with the variable types (
"u8 control_method", "u16 speed", etc)? If that is the case, why "u16 speed" is
in the middle of the u8 group variables?
> > +static inline bool is_cros_ec_cmd_fulfilled(struct cros_ec_device *cros_ec,
> > + u16 cmd, u8 version)
>
> "fulfilled" -> "available" or "present"
>
> > +{
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + ret = cros_ec_get_cmd_versions(cros_ec, cmd);
> > + return ret >= 0 && (ret & EC_VER_MASK(version));
> > +}
> > +
> > +static bool cros_ec_hwmon_probe_fan_control_supported(struct cros_ec_device *cros_ec)
> > +{
> > + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PM))
> > + return false;
>
> Why? This should generally work fine without CONFIG_PM.
> Only the suspend/resume callbacks are unnecessary in that case.
>
I treat fan control should include restoring the fan setting after resume, so
I think if no CONFIG_PM, the fan control is not complete. I am good with
removing this check, and if you have any thoughts after this explanation, please
share with me, otherwise I will remove it in the next series.
