On 09-11-18, 14:52, Shawn Guo wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 09, 2018 at 10:52:17AM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > On 08-11-18, 15:04, Shawn Guo wrote:
> > > +static int qcom_snps_hsphy_config_regulators(struct hsphy_priv *priv, int high)
> > > +{
> > > + int min, ret, i;
> > > +
> > > + min = high ? 1 : 0; /* low or none? */
> > > +
> > > + for (i = 0; i < VREG_NUM; i++) {
> > > + ret = regulator_set_voltage(priv->vregs[i].consumer,
> > > + priv->voltages[i][min],
> > > + priv->voltages[i][VOL_MAX]);
> > > + if (ret)
> > > + return ret;
> >
> > should we not roll back the set voltages on error?
>
> Yes. I will get that handled in v2. Thanks.
>
> >
> > > +static int qcom_snps_hsphy_por_reset(struct hsphy_priv *priv)
> > > +{
> > > + int ret;
> > > +
> > > + ret = reset_control_assert(priv->por_reset);
> > > + if (ret)
> > > + return ret;
> > > +
> > > + /*
> > > + * The Femto PHY is POR reset in the following scenarios.
> >
> > POR?
>
> Hmm, I do not understand this comment. The POR is commonly used as the
> abbrev of power-on-reset. What do you meat exactly?
I wasnt aware that POR refers to power-on-reset :) I dont know if it is
a very generic term :D
--
~Vinod
