[PATCH v2 07/16] iio: adc: sun4i-gpadc-iio: rework: support nvmem calibration data

quoted

quoted

quoted

   	/* prevents concurrent reads of temperature and ADC */
   	struct mutex			mutex;
   	struct thermal_zone_device	*tzd;

@@ -561,6 +569,9 @@ static int sun4i_gpadc_probe_dt(struct platform_device *pdev,
   	struct resource *mem;
   	void __iomem *base;
   	int ret;
+	struct nvmem_cell *cell;
+	ssize_t cell_size;
+	u64 *cell_data;
   	info->data = of_device_get_match_data(&pdev->dev);
   	if (!info->data)

@@ -575,6 +586,39 @@ static int sun4i_gpadc_probe_dt(struct platform_device *pdev,
   	if (IS_ERR(base))
   		return PTR_ERR(base);
+	info->has_calibration_data[0] = false;
+	info->has_calibration_data[1] = false;
+
+	if (!info->data->supports_nvmem)
+		goto no_nvmem;
+
+	cell = nvmem_cell_get(&pdev->dev, "calibration");
+	if (IS_ERR(cell)) {
+		if (PTR_ERR(cell) == -EPROBE_DEFER)
+			return PTR_ERR(cell);
+		goto no_nvmem;

goto considered evil ? :)

this was a suggestion from Jonatan in version one, to make the code better
readable.

Isn't

if (info->data->supports_nvmem && IS_ERR(cell = nvmem_cell_get()))

pretty much the same thing?

Maxime

I would say :

if (info->data->supports_nvmem && !IS_ERR(cell = nvmem_cell_get())) is

the same.
This would require an else if statement like this:

else if (info->data->supports_nvmem && PTR_ERR(cell) == -EPROBE_DEFER)
		return PTR_ERR(cell);

to avoid errors if the thermal sensor is probed before the sid driver.

Philipp