From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com>
To: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>
Cc: "Rupesh Majhi" <zoone.rupert@gmail.com>,
"Andy Shevchenko" <andy@kernel.org>,
"David Lechner" <dlechner@baylibre.com>,
"Eddie James" <eajames@linux.ibm.com>,
"Joel Stanley" <joel@jms.id.au>, "Nuno Sá" <nuno.sa@analog.com>,
linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iio: pressure: dps310: wait for a new sample after a ratio change
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2026 11:05:55 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <at8X810dwa98w9iL@ashevche-desk.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261026024605.3286702f@jic23-hlaptop>
On Mon, Oct 26, 2026 at 02:46:05AM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Oct 2026 22:06:49 +0300
> Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 19, 2026 at 06:33:28PM +0300, Rupesh Majhi wrote:
...
> > > /* Make sure sleep time is <= 30ms for usleep_range */
> > > #define DPS310_POLL_SLEEP_US(t) min(30000, (t) / 8)
> >
> > Seems the use of USEC_PER_SEC below should be postponed to a regular cleanup.
> > Because otherwise it will be inconsistent with the above where it would need
> > to be 30 * USEC_PER_MSEC
> Do we want to have the extra churn on the below?
I would bother in case there is no clean up patch attached and we will be left
with the good *temporary* inconsistency that lasts for years :-)
If Rupesh is going to add the patch to clean up that (before or after this patch)
I wouldn't be triggered.
> I'm not that bothered by a temporary state of different styles.
> Nice indeed to have a follow up tidying up other cases though!
>
> There is quite a bit going on around this driver, so I'm going to pick this
> one up for the testing branch of iio.git rather than the faster path.
> > > -/* Silently handle error in rate value here */
> > > -#define DPS310_POLL_TIMEOUT_US(rc) ((rc) <= 0 ? 1000000 : 1000000 / (rc))
> > > +/* A period plus a measurement time; silently handle error in rate value */
> > > +#define DPS310_POLL_TIMEOUT_US(rc) (2 * USEC_PER_SEC / max(rc, 1))
My comment basically based on the existence of the no-multiplier style, and
this patch *changes* it here, but not there. And it's *this* patch that brings
inconsistency.
However, this is quite a minor thingy, so up to you.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-26 9:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-19 15:33 Rupesh Majhi
2026-10-19 19:06 ` Andy Shevchenko
2026-10-26 2:46 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-10-26 9:05 ` Andy Shevchenko [this message]
2026-10-26 17:39 ` Rupesh Majhi
2026-10-27 0:28 ` Jonathan Cameron
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=at8X810dwa98w9iL@ashevche-desk.local \
--to=andriy.shevchenko@intel.com \
--cc=andy@kernel.org \
--cc=dlechner@baylibre.com \
--cc=eajames@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=jic23@kernel.org \
--cc=joel@jms.id.au \
--cc=linux-iio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nuno.sa@analog.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=zoone.rupert@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®