On Thu, Jun 11, 2026 at 03:33:42PM +0300, Svyatoslav Ryhel wrote:

ср, 10 черв. 2026 р. о 21:54 Andy Shevchenko [off-list ref] пише:

quoted

On Wed, Jun 10, 2026 at 05:45:28PM +0300, Svyatoslav Ryhel wrote:

quoted

вт, 9 черв. 2026 р. о 22:23 Andy Shevchenko [off-list ref] пише:

quoted

On Sat, Jun 06, 2026 at 07:57:38AM +0300, Svyatoslav Ryhel wrote:

quoted

Add Control Bank to HVLED/LVLED muxing support based on the led-sources
defined in the device tree.

...

quoted

quoted

quoted

quoted

+     int ret, i;

No need to add 'i'.

This is personal preference as well. There is no strict rule that
iteration variable must be defined strictly in the for loop.

This is a preference by Linus who is the leader of the project.
Also in IIO we have some set of maintainer preferences.

Well, this is not meant for IIO,

Oh, my bad. I am overwhelmed with the IIO patches, automatically thought that
I am dealing with yet another IIO patch.

though it seems that Lee is also in favor if this approach.

Good to know!

quoted

quoted

quoted

quoted

+             for (i = 0; i < led->num_leds; i++) {

                for (unsigned int i = 0; i < led->num_leds; i++) {

quoted

+                     if (led->leds[i] >= LM3533_LVCTRLBANK_MAX)
+                             continue;
+
+                     output_cfg_shift = led->leds[i] * 2;
+                     output_cfg_val |= led->id << output_cfg_shift;
+                     output_cfg_mask |= OUTPUT_LVLED_MASK << output_cfg_shift;
+             }

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko