drivers/iio/pressure/cros_ec_baro.c | 8 +------- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 7 deletions(-)
Use IIO_CHAN_SOFT_TIMESTAMP() to define the timestamp channel instead of
manually filling in the struct iio_chan_spec fields. This makes the code
less verbose and mistake-prone.
Also drop obvious comment while we're at it.
Signed-off-by: David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com>
---
drivers/iio/pressure/cros_ec_baro.c | 8 +-------
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/iio/pressure/cros_ec_baro.c b/drivers/iio/pressure/cros_ec_baro.c
index c6b950c596c1..6cbde48d5be3 100644
--- a/drivers/iio/pressure/cros_ec_baro.c
+++ b/drivers/iio/pressure/cros_ec_baro.c
@@ -170,14 +170,8 @@ static int cros_ec_baro_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
return -EINVAL;
}
- /* Timestamp */
channel++;
- channel->type = IIO_TIMESTAMP;
- channel->channel = -1;
- channel->scan_index = 1;
- channel->scan_type.sign = 's';
- channel->scan_type.realbits = 64;
- channel->scan_type.storagebits = 64;
+ *channel = IIO_CHAN_SOFT_TIMESTAMP(1);
indio_dev->channels = state->channels;
indio_dev->num_channels = CROS_EC_BARO_MAX_CHANNELS;
--
2.43.0
Hi David,
kernel test robot noticed the following build errors:
[auto build test ERROR on jic23-iio/togreg]
[also build test ERROR on linus/master v7.1-rc5 next-20260527]
[If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note.
And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in
https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch#_base_tree_information]
url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/David-Lechner/iio-pressure-cros_ec_baro-simplify-timestamp-channel-definition/20260525-134550
base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jic23/iio.git togreg
patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260525014654.2399354-1-dlechner%40baylibre.com
patch subject: [PATCH] iio: pressure: cros_ec_baro: simplify timestamp channel definition
config: m68k-allyesconfig (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20260528/202605281432.a64fe4iY-lkp@intel.com/config)
compiler: m68k-linux-gcc (GCC) 15.2.0
reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20260528/202605281432.a64fe4iY-lkp@intel.com/reproduce)
If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of
the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags
| Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
| Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202605281432.a64fe4iY-lkp@intel.com/
All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):
In file included from include/linux/iio/buffer.h:10,
from drivers/iio/pressure/cros_ec_baro.c:9:
drivers/iio/pressure/cros_ec_baro.c: In function 'cros_ec_baro_probe':
>> include/linux/iio/iio.h:356:38: error: expected expression before '{' token
356 | #define IIO_CHAN_SOFT_TIMESTAMP(_si) { \
| ^
drivers/iio/pressure/cros_ec_baro.c:174:20: note: in expansion of macro 'IIO_CHAN_SOFT_TIMESTAMP'
174 | *channel = IIO_CHAN_SOFT_TIMESTAMP(1);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
vim +356 include/linux/iio/iio.h
00c5f80c2fad53 include/linux/iio/iio.h Peter Rosin 2016-11-08 355
07d4655b410a4d include/linux/iio/iio.h Jonathan Cameron 2013-11-12 @356 #define IIO_CHAN_SOFT_TIMESTAMP(_si) { \
07d4655b410a4d include/linux/iio/iio.h Jonathan Cameron 2013-11-12 357 .type = IIO_TIMESTAMP, \
07d4655b410a4d include/linux/iio/iio.h Jonathan Cameron 2013-11-12 358 .channel = -1, \
07d4655b410a4d include/linux/iio/iio.h Jonathan Cameron 2013-11-12 359 .scan_index = _si, \
07d4655b410a4d include/linux/iio/iio.h Jonathan Cameron 2013-11-12 360 .scan_type = { \
07d4655b410a4d include/linux/iio/iio.h Jonathan Cameron 2013-11-12 361 .sign = 's', \
07d4655b410a4d include/linux/iio/iio.h Jonathan Cameron 2013-11-12 362 .realbits = 64, \
07d4655b410a4d include/linux/iio/iio.h Jonathan Cameron 2013-11-12 363 .storagebits = 64, \
07d4655b410a4d include/linux/iio/iio.h Jonathan Cameron 2013-11-12 364 }, \
07d4655b410a4d include/linux/iio/iio.h Jonathan Cameron 2013-11-12 365 }
1d892719e70e47 drivers/staging/iio/iio.h Jonathan Cameron 2011-05-18 366
--
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service
https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki
On Thu, 28 May 2026 14:40:51 +0800
kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> kernel test robot noticed the following build errors:
>
For the record, this is a side effect of some email trouble David had.
It's meant to be in a series with the patch that makes that macro
a compound literal.
> [auto build test ERROR on jic23-iio/togreg]
> [also build test ERROR on linus/master v7.1-rc5 next-20260527]
> [If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note.
> And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in
> https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch#_base_tree_information]
>
> url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/David-Lechner/iio-pressure-cros_ec_baro-simplify-timestamp-channel-definition/20260525-134550
> base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jic23/iio.git togreg
> patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260525014654.2399354-1-dlechner%40baylibre.com
> patch subject: [PATCH] iio: pressure: cros_ec_baro: simplify timestamp channel definition
> config: m68k-allyesconfig (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20260528/202605281432.a64fe4iY-lkp@intel.com/config)
> compiler: m68k-linux-gcc (GCC) 15.2.0
> reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20260528/202605281432.a64fe4iY-lkp@intel.com/reproduce)
>
> If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of
> the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags
> | Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202605281432.a64fe4iY-lkp@intel.com/
>
> All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):
>
> In file included from include/linux/iio/buffer.h:10,
> from drivers/iio/pressure/cros_ec_baro.c:9:
> drivers/iio/pressure/cros_ec_baro.c: In function 'cros_ec_baro_probe':
> >> include/linux/iio/iio.h:356:38: error: expected expression before '{' token
> 356 | #define IIO_CHAN_SOFT_TIMESTAMP(_si) { \
> | ^
> drivers/iio/pressure/cros_ec_baro.c:174:20: note: in expansion of macro 'IIO_CHAN_SOFT_TIMESTAMP'
> 174 | *channel = IIO_CHAN_SOFT_TIMESTAMP(1);
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>
> vim +356 include/linux/iio/iio.h
>
> 00c5f80c2fad53 include/linux/iio/iio.h Peter Rosin 2016-11-08 355
> 07d4655b410a4d include/linux/iio/iio.h Jonathan Cameron 2013-11-12 @356 #define IIO_CHAN_SOFT_TIMESTAMP(_si) { \
> 07d4655b410a4d include/linux/iio/iio.h Jonathan Cameron 2013-11-12 357 .type = IIO_TIMESTAMP, \
> 07d4655b410a4d include/linux/iio/iio.h Jonathan Cameron 2013-11-12 358 .channel = -1, \
> 07d4655b410a4d include/linux/iio/iio.h Jonathan Cameron 2013-11-12 359 .scan_index = _si, \
> 07d4655b410a4d include/linux/iio/iio.h Jonathan Cameron 2013-11-12 360 .scan_type = { \
> 07d4655b410a4d include/linux/iio/iio.h Jonathan Cameron 2013-11-12 361 .sign = 's', \
> 07d4655b410a4d include/linux/iio/iio.h Jonathan Cameron 2013-11-12 362 .realbits = 64, \
> 07d4655b410a4d include/linux/iio/iio.h Jonathan Cameron 2013-11-12 363 .storagebits = 64, \
> 07d4655b410a4d include/linux/iio/iio.h Jonathan Cameron 2013-11-12 364 }, \
> 07d4655b410a4d include/linux/iio/iio.h Jonathan Cameron 2013-11-12 365 }
> 1d892719e70e47 drivers/staging/iio/iio.h Jonathan Cameron 2011-05-18 366
>
> --
> 0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service
> https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki
On 5/24/26 8:46 PM, David Lechner wrote: > Use IIO_CHAN_SOFT_TIMESTAMP() to define the timestamp channel instead of > manually filling in the struct iio_chan_spec fields. This makes the code > less verbose and mistake-prone. > FYI, there was a server error when doing b4 send, so this last patch didn't get sent with the rest. I missed the [PATCH v2 9/9] when editing it manually to send again.
On Sun, 24 May 2026 20:49:11 -0500 David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com> wrote: > On 5/24/26 8:46 PM, David Lechner wrote: > > Use IIO_CHAN_SOFT_TIMESTAMP() to define the timestamp channel instead of > > manually filling in the struct iio_chan_spec fields. This makes the code > > less verbose and mistake-prone. > > > FYI, there was a server error when doing b4 send, so this last patch > didn't get sent with the rest. I missed the [PATCH v2 9/9] when editing > it manually to send again. > > New and exciting way to confuse b4 :) Anyhow easy to work around with a -v 2 for the first lot and then it thinks this one is v3 anyway. Applied. Thanks, Jonathan
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.