czw., 28 mar 2019 o 15:11 Alan Stern <stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> napisał(a): > > On Thu, 28 Mar 2019, Sekhar Nori wrote: > > > >> Can you document why the current solution is not optimal? Is it to make > > >> future device-tree conversion for these boards easier? Or? > > >> > > > > > > It's sub-optimal from the HW modeling in SW PoV - it is in fact a > > > regulator enabled/disabled by a GPIO. Also: it's code duplication as > > > currently we check if the vbus GPIO exists and then use it or check if > > > the regulator exists and use this as the second choice. The third > > > patch actually shrinks the driver. > > > > I see now that the driver supports controlling the VBUS gpio as > > regulator already. Something I should have caught in review last time > > around. > > > > I agree this patch is an improvement. Lets see what Alan feels. > > I'm not an expert on this stuff, but the patch looks reasonable. > However, I do wish that in the devm_request_threaded_irq() call, the > indentation of the continuation lines was left unchanged. > I don't think it's possible - the function name is longer and the first line exceeds the 80 characters limit. I can put all the parameters below the function name if you prefer that? Bart > Alan Stern > > > Also, reg_enabled member of da8xx_ohci_hcd structure seems to be pretty > > useless considering regulator API already has use counting. Can you take > > a look and remove that too as an added bonus. > > > > Thanks, > > Sekhar > >
