On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 12:45:03PM +0100, Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz wrote:
> @@ -653,6 +708,10 @@ spmi_regulator_find_range(struct spmi_regulator *vreg)
> range = vreg->set_points->range;
> end = range + vreg->set_points->count;
>
> + /* we know we only have one range for this type */
> + if (vreg->logical_type == SPMI_REGULATOR_LOGICAL_TYPE_HFS430)
> + return range;
> +
> spmi_vreg_read(vreg, SPMI_COMMON_REG_VOLTAGE_RANGE, &range_sel, 1);
>
> for (; range < end; range++)
Rather than have special casing for the logical type in here it seems
better to just provide a specific op for this logical type, you could
always make _find_range() call into that one if you really want code
reuse here. You already have separate ops for this regulator type
anyway.
> +static unsigned int spmi_regulator_hfs430_get_mode(struct regulator_dev *rdev)
> +{
> + struct spmi_regulator *vreg = rdev_get_drvdata(rdev);
> + u8 reg;
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = spmi_vreg_read(vreg, SPMI_HFS430_REG_MODE, ®, 1);
> + if (ret) {
> + dev_err(&rdev->dev, "failed to get mode");
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> + if (reg == SPMI_HFS430_MODE_PWM)
> + return REGULATOR_MODE_NORMAL;
> +
> + return REGULATOR_MODE_IDLE;
> +}
I'd have expected a switch statement here, ideally flagging a warning or
error if we get a surprising value in there.
> +static int spmi_regulator_hfs430_set_mode(struct regulator_dev *rdev,
> + unsigned int mode)
> +{
> + struct spmi_regulator *vreg = rdev_get_drvdata(rdev);
> + u8 reg = mode == REGULATOR_MODE_NORMAL ? SPMI_HFS430_MODE_PWM :
> + SPMI_HFS430_MODE_AUTO;
Please write a normal if statement (or switch statement) to help
legibility.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
