Thanks for the review!
On 20/02/2019 19:22, Joe Perches wrote:
On Wed, 2019-02-20 at 09:49 +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 13:01:23 -0800 Joe Perches <j...@perches.com> wrote:
On Mon, 2019-02-18 at 14:22 -0300, Lucas Oshiro wrote:
Add missing '\n' at the end of dev_err message on line 215.
[]
diff --git a/drivers/iio/potentiostat/lmp91000.c
b/drivers/iio/potentiostat/lmp91000.c
[]
@@ -212,7 +212,7 @@ static int lmp91000_read_config(struct lmp91000_data *data)
ret = of_property_read_u32(np, "ti,tia-gain-ohm", &val);
if (ret) {
if (!of_property_read_bool(np, "ti,external-tia-resistor")) {
- dev_err(dev, "no ti,tia-gain-ohm defined");
+ dev_err(dev, "no ti,tia-gain-ohm defined\n");
Perhaps a copy/paste error as the test is for
external-tia-resistor and not tia-gain-ohm
It is an odd construct, but I think this is correct. What it is actually
saying is that, given that we don't have an external resistor, we care
that the tia-gain-ohm isn't set (otherwise it wouldn't matter).
From the docs
- ti,external-tia-resistor: if the property ti,tia-gain-ohm is not defined
this
needs to be set to signal that an external resistor value is being used.
So, it might be ideal to say that tia-gain-ohm is not defined and we do
not have an external resistor specified.
So not wrong, but could be more informative! So perhaps a follow up patch
to tidy that up would be good.
So, this means that it's a good idea to change the dev_err message to something
like "no ti,tia-gain-ohm defined and external resistor not specified"?
Then thanks in advance for doing that.
cheers, Joe
