Hi Fabrice,
On 19 October 2018 at 01:40, Fabrice Gasnier fabrice.gasnier@st.com wrote:
On 10/19/2018 05:25 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Fabrice,
On 11 October 2018 at 10:00, Fabrice Gasnier fabrice.gasnier@st.com wrote:
Enhance adc info command to report also the channel mask.
Signed-off-by: Fabrice Gasnier fabrice.gasnier@st.com
cmd/adc.c | 6 +++++- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/cmd/adc.c b/cmd/adc.c index c8857ed..39f61c1 100644 --- a/cmd/adc.c +++ b/cmd/adc.c @@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ static int do_adc_info(cmd_tbl_t *cmdtp, int flag, int argc, char *const argv[]) { struct udevice *dev;
unsigned int data_mask;
unsigned int data_mask, ch_mask; int ret, vss, vdd; if (argc < 2)@@ -49,6 +49,10 @@ static int do_adc_info(cmd_tbl_t *cmdtp, int flag, int argc,
printf("ADC Device '%s' :\n", argv[1]);
ret = adc_channel_mask(dev, &ch_mask);Could this just return the channel mask in the return value (or -ve on error)?
Hi Simon,
Channel mask is unsigned, so I would prefer to rely on (signed) ret to return -ve on error, or success. And use pointer for the unsigned mask.
Do you agree to keep this approach ?
Yes that's OK with me.
Regards, Simon