On 5/22/2019 5:01 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 05:16:06PM -0600, Jeffrey Hugo wrote:
On 5/21/2019 12:50 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
+static int spmi_regulator_common_list_voltage(struct regulator_dev *rdev,
+ unsigned selector);
+
+static int spmi_regulator_common2_set_voltage(struct regulator_dev *rdev,
+ unsigned selector)
Eeew, can we not have better names?
I'm open to suggestions. Apparently there are two register common register
schemes - the old one and the new one. PMIC designs after some random point
in time are all the new register scheme per the documentation I see.
As far as I an aware, the FT426 design is the first design to be added to
this driver to make use of the new scheme, but I expect more to be supported
in future, thus I'm reluctant to make these ft426 specific in the name.
If there's a completely new register map why are these even in the same
driver?
Its not completely new, its a derivative of the old scheme. Of the 104
registers, approximately 5 have been modified, therefore the new scheme
is 95% compatible with the old one. Duplicating a 1883 line driver to
handle a change in 5% of the register space seems less than ideal.
Particularly considering your previous comments seem to indicate that
you feel its pretty trivial to handle the quirks associated with the
changes in this driver.
+ if (reg == SPMI_COMMON2_MODE_HPM_MASK)
+ return REGULATOR_MODE_NORMAL;
+
+ if (reg == SPMI_COMMON2_MODE_AUTO_MASK)
+ return REGULATOR_MODE_FAST;
+
+ return REGULATOR_MODE_IDLE;
+}
This looks like you want to write a switch statement.
It follows the existing style in the driver, but sure I can make this a
switch.
Please fix the rest of the driver as well then.
--
Jeffrey Hugo
Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies as an affiliate of Qualcomm
Technologies, Inc.
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the
Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.
