linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] regulator: tps6586x: add SMx slew rate setting

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1BA5D2DFD2730747A2B3725B59933B93C07A47561C@HKMAIL01.nvidia.com>
Date:	Fri, 5 Aug 2011 19:51:15 +0800
From:	Danny Huang <dahuang@...dia.com>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
CC:	"lrg@...com" <lrg@...com>,
	"mike@...pulab.co.il" <mike@...pulab.co.il>,
	"sameo@...ux.intel.com" <sameo@...ux.intel.com>,
	Xin Xie <xxie@...dia.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] regulator: tps6586x: add SMx slew rate setting

Thanks for the feedback.
The reason for using driver_data is that I can't find a proper field in regulator_init_data for the slew rate setting.
I'll do some correction based on the feedback and try to add a new field for the slew rate setting.

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Brown [mailto:broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com] 
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 20:13
To: Danny Huang
Cc: lrg@...com; mike@...pulab.co.il; sameo@...ux.intel.com; Xin Xie; gking@...dia.com; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: tps6586x: add SMx slew rate setting

On Thu, Aug 04, 2011 at 07:34:22PM +0800, dahuang@...dia.com wrote:
> From: Danny Huang <dahuang@...dia.com>
> 
> Add output vlotage slew rate setting for SM0/SM1
> 
> From: Xin Xie <xxie@...dia.com>

Looks like you messed up here, I rather suspect Xin Xie rather than you should be the author?

> +static int tps6586x_regulator_set_slew_rate(struct platform_device 
> +*pdev) {
> +	struct device *parent = pdev->dev.parent;
> +	struct regulator_init_data *p = pdev->dev.platform_data;
> +	struct tps6586x_settings *setting = p->driver_data;

If this is system configured data (which is what one would expect for
this) it should be coming in as platform data not driver data - what's happened here?

> +	default:
> +		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "invalid regulator ID\n");
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +	}

Should say what data is invalid here, otherwise it's not going to be at all obvious what's invalid.

> +enum {
> +	TPS6586x_SLEW_RATE_INSTANTLY,
> +	TPS6586x_SLEW_RATE_110UV,
> +	TPS6586x_SLEW_RATE_220UV,
> +	TPS6586x_SLEW_RATE_440UV,
> +	TPS6586x_SLEW_RATE_880UV,
> +	TPS6586x_SLEW_RATE_1760UV,
> +	TPS6586x_SLEW_RATE_3520UV,
> +	TPS6586x_SLEW_RATE_7040UV,
> +};

If the values are being written directly to the chip you should probably explicitly specify the values that are being set.
--
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/