On Fri, 20 May 2022 at 18:09, Kuogee Hsieh <quic_khsieh@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> On 5/19/2022 5:19 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > Quoting Kuogee Hsieh (2022-05-19 16:11:40)
> >> diff --git a/drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-edp.c b/drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-edp.c
> >> index cacd32f..78b7306 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-edp.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-edp.c
> >> @@ -87,14 +87,19 @@ struct qcom_edp {
> >>
> >> struct clk_bulk_data clks[2];
> >> struct regulator_bulk_data supplies[2];
> >> + int enable_load[2];
> >> };
> >>
> >> static int qcom_edp_phy_init(struct phy *phy)
> >> {
> >> struct qcom_edp *edp = phy_get_drvdata(phy);
> >> int ret;
> >> + int i;
> >>
> >> - ret = regulator_bulk_enable(ARRAY_SIZE(edp->supplies), edp->supplies);
> >> + for (i = 0; i < 2; i++)
> > Use ARRAY_SIZE(edp->supplies)?
> >
> >> + regulator_set_load(edp->supplies[i].consumer, edp->enable_load[i]);
> >> +
> >> + ret = regulator_bulk_enable(2, edp->supplies);
> > Why is ARRAY_SIZE() usage removed?
>
>
> remove it base on Dmitry's comment.
Ugh. I asked to remove the num_consumers variable, not the ARRAY_SIZE.
>
> I will restore it back to use ARRY_SIZE
>
>
> >
> >> if (ret)
> >> return ret;
> >>
--
With best wishes
Dmitry
