On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 02:11:02PM -0800, Doug Anderson wrote: > On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 4:59 AM, Mark Brown <broonie at kernel.org> wrote: > > Perhaps doing something based on the various factorings out of the > > voltage mapping would do the trick, add a new op for getting to the > > closest voltage? > I'd really rather add a new op because I think it would mean that all > the old regulators that don't implement the op would be slow all of a > sudden. :( Assuming there's a not missing there... I don't think it's quite that bad, most regulators do use one of the standard mapping functions and for those that are likely to matter for performance there's usually a calculation rather than a lookup table. That said... > I looked at trying to refactor everything, but I think the answer is > that I should drop my patch and consider the existing > regulator_set_voltage_tol() experience good enough. While I could go > through and try to make regulator_set_voltage_tol() better: ...I do agree that the current situation is probably adequate though, the optimisation would be nice but it's mainly going to benefit corner cases. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 473 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-rockchip/attachments/20141216/39caea14/attachment.sig>
