[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=4Bv72d56XU+4jXZ8wHp+R_1VfaKOrvp_PtG4M@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2010 19:18:14 +0800
From: Axel Lin <axel.lin@...il.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Haojian Zhuang <haojian.zhuang@...vell.com>,
Liam Girdwood <lrg@...mlogic.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: max8649 - fix setting extclk_freq
2010/10/1 Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>:
> On Fri, Oct 01, 2010 at 01:56:27PM +0800, Axel Lin wrote:
>> The SYNC bits are BIT6 and BIT7 of MAX8649_SYNC register.
>> pdata->extclk_freq could be [0|1|2].
>> (MAX8649_EXTCLK_26MHZ|MAX8649_EXTCLK_13MHZ|MAX8649_EXTCLK_19MHZ)
>> It requires to left shift 6 bits to properly set extclk_freq.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Axel Lin <axel.lin@...il.com>
>
> Are there existing users of the driver? It's not always 100% clear if
> people are expecting bitfield values that will be shifted in or values
> that can be ored directly in. I don't really mind either way but I'd
> rather be careful.
>
I think I should explain this way:
In max8649.h , we have
enum {
MAX8649_EXTCLK_26MHZ = 0,
MAX8649_EXTCLK_13MHZ,
MAX8649_EXTCLK_19MHZ, /* 19.2MHz */
};
Thus, I think users will set
extclk_freq = MAX8649_EXTCLK_26MHZ;
but not
extclk_freq = (MAX8649_EXTCLK_26MHZ << 6);
Regards,
Axel
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists