On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 08:00:26PM +0100, Stephan Gerhold wrote:
> Setting the vibrator enable_mask is not implemented correctly:
>
> For regmap_update_bits(map, reg, mask, val) we give in either
> regs->enable_mask or 0 (= no-op) as mask and "val" as value.
> But "val" actually refers to the vibrator voltage control register,
> which has nothing to do with the enable_mask.
>
> So we usually end up doing nothing when we really wanted
> to enable the vibrator.
>
> We want to set or clear the enable_mask (to enable/disable the vibrator).
> Therefore, change the call to always modify the enable_mask
> and set the bits only if we want to enable the vibrator.
>
> Cc: Damien Riegel <damien.riegel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Fixes: d4c7c5c96c92 ("Input: pm8xxx-vib - handle separate enable register")
> Signed-off-by: Stephan Gerhold <stephan@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/input/misc/pm8xxx-vibrator.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/input/misc/pm8xxx-vibrator.c b/drivers/input/misc/pm8xxx-vibrator.c
> index ecd762f93732..8dc345604a4d 100644
> --- a/drivers/input/misc/pm8xxx-vibrator.c
> +++ b/drivers/input/misc/pm8xxx-vibrator.c
> @@ -90,7 +90,8 @@ static int pm8xxx_vib_set(struct pm8xxx_vib *vib, bool on)
>
> if (regs->enable_mask)
> rc = regmap_update_bits(vib->regmap, regs->enable_addr,
> - on ? regs->enable_mask : 0, val);
> + regs->enable_mask,
> + on ? regs->enable_mask : 0);
Would it be even clearer to say
rc = regmap_update_bits(vib->regmap, regs->enable_addr,
regs->enable_mask, on ? ~0 : 0);
?
Thanks.
--
Dmitry
