Hi Mark,
On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 12:49:31, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 03:22:27PM +0530, AnilKumar Ch wrote:
>
> This looks pretty good. A couple of small issues.
>
> > +static int tps65217_vsel_to_uv_range1(unsigned int vsel)
> > +{
> > + int uV = 0;
> > +
> > + if (vsel > 15)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > +
> > + if (vsel <= 2)
> > + uV = vsel * 100000 + 1000000;
> > + else if (vsel <= 6)
> > + uV = (vsel - 2) * 50000 + 1200000;
> > + else if (vsel <= 9)
> > + uV = (vsel - 6) * 100000 + 1400000;
> > + else if (vsel == 10)
> > + uV = 2500000;
> > + else if (vsel == 11)
> > + uV = 2750000;
> > + else if (vsel == 12)
> > + uV = 2800000;
> > + else if (vsel == 13)
> > + uV = 3000000;
> > + else if (vsel == 14)
> > + uV = 3100000;
> > + else
> > + uV = 3300000;
>
> This looks like it should actually be a table - there's far too many
> irregular steps here. The other regulators looked to be benefiting from
> the use of calculations.
Changed to a table for this regulator only.
>
> > +static int tps65217_pmic_dcdc_get_voltage(struct regulator_dev *dev)
> > +{
> > + int ret;
> > + struct tps65217 *tps = rdev_get_drvdata(dev);
> > + unsigned int data, dcdc = rdev_get_id(dev);
> > +
> > + if (dcdc < TPS65217_DCDC_1 || dcdc > TPS65217_DCDC_3)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > +
> > + ret = tps65217_reg_read(tps, tps->info[dcdc]->set_vout_reg, &data);
> > + if (ret)
> > + return ret;
> > +
> > + data &= tps->info[dcdc]->set_vout_mask;
> > +
> > + ret = tps->info[dcdc]->tps_range(data);
> > + if (ret < 0)
> > + dev_err(&dev->dev, "Failed to get voltage\n");
> > +
> > + return ret;
>
> It seems odd to implement this as a vanilla get_voltage()
Agree, changed to get_voltage_sel()
>
> > +static int tps65217_pmic_dcdc_set_voltage(struct regulator_dev *dev,
> > + unsigned selector)
> > +{
>
> but this as set_voltage_sel(). For non table based regulators plain
> set_voltage() usually makes a bit more sense as we don't have to iterate
> through the selectors looking for a match.
>
I changed the implementation according to your point but the
code size actually increased by 68 lines after fixing these
comments. I will send across the replacement, please see if
you like this one better.
Regards,
AnilKumar
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
