From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; t=1794081858; b=E1DlV++bJWQ2TplWkFhRYLDoiuO2Z58WUVC7ozzgcZ3pIknh5oUS3/QbawCu0fHImy+y KRVqlHB/7ZCalztkMBW8TPHC2bVehxTLmJiWny8lKRhDUUkzKnOO8LeN1/5MxEPpiKCYB wGoYE8D9GWZpAm04ewt6uk0mqnhMO2oIEJqZvaojvYjJNWlHRVU0DEdz76WMY4SbHHej2 JW5lj+th0vXNBBnMXd7Uw3DK9/i0ZvyPOe10bV7nWrnke7WVpgDWtGzfWF9ONiJCVzXTU 6g3mIPVr507zJLc/0NrgSxE1hA5KLzc1jOHxv58btM8E4KgGxmgEhGjUZLzuDHwbKng== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1794081858; h=Received:DKIM-Signature:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID: In-Reply-To:References:X-Mailer:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding; bh=XcCQW3UyOP8aWJHC96IWsCCnVyRPHeoCNPMs8q03Lv4=; b=YfCEGTKX8WHmFy/hBv+Yve5zSAM3rbh8n/sBwoOo6GfVX/X+TuS6yQW6Zr34Ijs7Qz6p 9ePlQSqc9wTU5FfJV9m4uxrmXFfBY6sxFXr8vfy/Iix/lpiP+kEgkeEwl3lyIj5NcYaQw sYscvrI6ov2rBVeXkmUfecVukLpA5PP2WqOUhwPpv/xToHlKXmVnOojbaXEBnI/2UOvdo kI4NtnSvqqBfimU+lfBvwQ0zEO86+BElKgNAl0A054yFSIAT7bqyMTiubhYJWc/GJWl// V5HcO7QtF3qW0P8VrZw4Kt4qRM+PwMwKhQekjgIKjQyHCOLQ2Vs9hPEPOe5ToY1+OtQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20260515 header.b=OT6SSsBA; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=100.103.45.18 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (quasi.space.kernel.org [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 97845606A326; Sat, 7 Nov 2026 20:04:18 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20260515 header.b=OT6SSsBA Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 51FC61F0089F; Sat, 7 Nov 2026 20:04:16 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1794081858; bh=XcCQW3UyOP8aWJHC96IWsCCnVyRPHeoCNPMs8q03Lv4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=OT6SSsBAecZiK5duvFqam8E0nNHIvOu1QL3+A4aHqvngXiimH+X1cxu4ni38SSyQY B0Dccr+4i67aujq68KjnNOdOb0NcJvU3I2FwOBvWCutjtRVWUDrv5howQ9VfXLa2gj CoJESSHO9fIrTERLzH2EaT/OCuI7wseL6QRgFPrrHWII5jj9FJ/R2tHSOTA0ijjLz7 UKBaNwb1BPd9RiqSt8do1V61fuLUO11cGKQcDdIZA4Oke7oy9+plWNIxtEp8Qr5bB0 FXSeojxIhYbxZj//80bq6xkHjkW/3VH1R6bZ2E+jrk7Soe77PLouOBZmt5FiXjXyge +a/OGxrW5xd2A== Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2026 20:04:12 +0000 From: Jonathan Cameron To: Joshua Crofts Cc: Chen Ni , Marcelo Schmitt , Nuno =?UTF-8?B?U8Oh?= , Michael Hennerich , David Lechner , linux@analog.com, linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andy Shevchenko Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] iio: adc: ad4134: Fix duplicate data_read mux state request Message-ID: <20261107200412.572956f6@jic23-hlaptop> In-Reply-To: <20261105141846.00004e3a@kernel.org> References: <20261105033120.387616-1-nichen@iscas.ac.cn> <20261105141846.00004e3a@kernel.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.4.0 (GTK 3.24.52; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: List-Owner: Precedence: list MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, 5 Nov 2026 14:18:46 +0100 Joshua Crofts wrote: > On Thu, 5 Nov 2026 11:31:20 +0800 > Chen Ni wrote: > > > devm_mux_state_get() is called twice in a row. The second call's result > > is stored directly into st->mux_st[AD4134_DOUT0_INPUT] without error > > checking, and then immediately overwritten by the first call's result. > > > > Remove the duplicate call and check the return value before saving the > > state. > > > > Fixes: f12ecb3e147b ("iio: adc: ad4134: Support SPI 4-wire mode") > > Signed-off-by: Chen Ni > > Ideally your Signed-off-by tag should be the last one in the tag > block. No need to resend however, this can be tweaked when applying. > Applied but with fixes tag dropped. Those aren't stable until a series has gone upstream and I've long given up on trying to fix them up as the tree evolves. I tweaked the ordering though I'll note I normally don't bother too much on this as any review tags that come in after the new posting go after the sign off anyway so it's a subtle distinction that I'm not sure matters in practice! Marcelo, this one looks obviously right but please take a look just to be sure. Jonathan