Re: [PATCH v2 2/8] iio: imu: inv_icm45600: add new inv_icm45600 driver

[Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com>]

On Tue, Jul 15, 2025 at 03:26:48PM +0000, Remi Buisson wrote:
> >From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com> 
> >Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 12:43 PM
> >On Tue, Jul 15, 2025 at 09:11:47AM +0000, Remi Buisson wrote:
> >> >From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com> 
> >> >Sent: Friday, July 11, 2025 1:56 PM
> >> >On Fri, Jul 11, 2025 at 11:32:48AM +0000, Remi Buisson wrote:
> >> >> >From: Andy Shevchenko andriy.shevchenko@intel.com<mailto:andriy.shevchenko@intel.com>
> >> >> >Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2025 11:30 AM
> >> >> >On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 08:57:57AM +0000, Remi Buisson via B4 Relay wrote:

...

> >> >> It's probably safer to keep the delay even in case of failure to make sure
> >> >> the device is ready before next operation.
> >> >
> >> >I am not sure about it. Why? This has to be well justified as it's quite
> >> >unusual pattern.
> >
> >> Ok I understand, the hardware needs that delay if the access was actually
> >> done on the bus (to not jeopardize next access).  If a regmap error means
> >> that no real access occured then the delay is avoidable.
> >
> >Perhaps you need to have this delay embedded in the IO accessors? Also do
> >read _and_ write need this or only one of them?

> It's required for both indirect read and write BUT not when writing the first data
> which need to be done in a single burst.
> Could you please be more specific on how to add delays to IO accessors?

I don't remember if regmap core supports already such a delay, but always
working case is to redefine your own regmap_read()/regmap_write() callbacks.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko