Hi Benjamin,
On 4/5/23 08:29, Benjamin Bara wrote:
From: Benjamin Bara <benjamin.bara@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Add the definitions for the registers responsible for voltage
monitoring. Add a voltage monitor enable bitfield per regulator.
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Bara <benjamin.bara@xxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/regulator/da9063-regulator.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
include/linux/mfd/da9063/registers.h | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 52 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/regulator/da9063-regulator.c b/drivers/regulator/da9063-regulator.c
index 82f52a2a031a..1c720fc595b3 100644
--- a/drivers/regulator/da9063-regulator.c
+++ b/drivers/regulator/da9063-regulator.c
...
@@ -932,6 +955,12 @@ static int da9063_regulator_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
if (IS_ERR(regl->suspend_sleep))
return PTR_ERR(regl->suspend_sleep);
}
+ if (regl->info->vmon.reg) {
Just a very minor thing - wouldn't this check be better as:
if (regl->info->vmon.mask) ?
We may have device(s) where 0 is a valid reg. However, mask 0 is
probably not making sense - unless I misunderstand something?
Well, I guess the reg 0 is not valid for vmon on currently supported
ICs, and it probably is unlikely that would happen on a future device
either. Still, treating register 0 as 'not initialized' always feels a
tad bad for me if it can be avoided. So, perhaps consider this if you
re-spin for some other reason - but I don't think this is by any means
crucial.
FWIW:
Reviewed-by: Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@xxxxxxxxx>
+ regl->vmon = devm_regmap_field_alloc(&pdev->dev,
+ da9063->regmap, regl->info->vmon);
+ if (IS_ERR(regl->vmon))
+ return PTR_ERR(regl->vmon);
+ }
--
Matti Vaittinen
Linux kernel developer at ROHM Semiconductors
Oulu Finland
~~ When things go utterly wrong vim users can always type :help! ~~
