Re: [PATCH 3/3] hwmon: (adm9240) Convert to devm_hwmon_device_register_with_info API

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 13/05/21 10:51 am, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 5/12/21 3:41 PM, Chris Packham wrote:
>>
>> On 13/05/21 10:35 am, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>>> On 5/12/21 3:09 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>>>> On 5/12/21 2:54 PM, Chris Packham wrote:
>>>>> Hi Guenter,
>>>>>
>>>>> On 11/03/21 8:33 pm, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>>>>>> Also use regmap for register caching. This change reduces code and
>>>>>> data size by more than 40%.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> While at it, fixed some warnings reported by checkpatch.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cc: Chris Packham <Chris.Packham@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>
>>>>> I've just been informed by our QA team that it looks like the
>>>>> configuration of limits (e.g. by writing to sysfs) has been broken.
>>>>> Probably by this change. I'm just starting to dig into it now but I
>>>>> though I'd give you a heads up.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the heads up.
>>>>
>>>> It looks like voltage maximum writes use the wrong register,
>>>> ADM9240_REG_IN instead of ADM9240_REG_IN_MAX.
>>>> Odd, I'd have assumed that my module test code catches that.
>>>> I'll have to check why it doesn't.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, turns out my module test script does not catch that situation.
>>> It tries to find the value range and determines that there is no range
>>> (because all writes are into the wrong register). I'll have to fix 
>>> that.
>>>
>>>> Anyway, anything more specific ?
>>>>
>>> I'll wait for your response before submitting a patch.
>>>
>> I agree that the writes to max aren't working. Haven't checked min.
>>
>> [root@awplus flash]# cat /sys/class/hwmon/hwmon0/in5_max
>> 3586
>> [root@awplus flash]# echo 1097 >/sys/class/hwmon/hwmon0/in5_max
>> [root@awplus flash]# cat /sys/class/hwmon/hwmon0/in5_max
>> 3586
>>
>
> Anything else ? I got a patch ready to fix that, but I would prefer to
> fix everything in one go if possible. My (fixed) module test script
> doesn't pick up other problems, but obviously we can't really trust it.
>
Everything else seems OK, I think it was just the max. That was 
certainly the only thing the QA team was complaining about.

Thanks for the quick work.

> Thanks,
> Guenter




[Index of Archives]     [LM Sensors]     [Linux Sound]     [ALSA Users]     [ALSA Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Media]     [Kernel]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Media]

  Powered by Linux