[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-id: <4FBC6A2D.6040408@samsung.com>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 13:40:13 +0900
From: jonghwa3.lee@...sung.com
To: Yadwinder Singh Brar <yadi.brar01@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
Liam Girdwood <lrg@...com>,
Yadwinder Singh Brar <yadi.brar@...sung.com>,
Kyungmin Park <kmpark@...radead.org>,
Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] regulator: Add support for MAX77686.
On 2012년 05월 23일 13:16, Yadwinder Singh Brar wrote:
>>> + max77686_update_reg(i2c, MAX77686_REG_BUCK2CTRL1,
>>> + max77686->ramp_delay << 6, RAMP_MASK);
>>> + max77686_update_reg(i2c, MAX77686_REG_BUCK3CTRL1,
>>> + max77686->ramp_delay << 6, RAMP_MASK);
>>> + max77686_update_reg(i2c, MAX77686_REG_BUCK4CTRL1,
>>> + max77686->ramp_delay << 6, RAMP_MASK);
>>> +
>>
>>
>> Why do you use i2c client still? If you registered regmap you can use
>> its API. I recommend you to use regmap_update_bits() directly.
>>
>>
>
> Yes, we are using regmap_update_bits(). max77686_update_reg() is just
> a wrapper over it.
>
Yes, i know what you mean. However it doesn't need max77686_update_reg()
any more since it uses regmap API. Why don't you just pass iodev->regmap
to regmap_update_bits(). It is clear that there is no reason for using
i2c client as a medium. Please check regulator and mfd driver of my
previous patch.
Thanks.
--
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