[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAF+7xWnQNGL8Q0mCLMTHrUnW-cbOuNLydFW+b6Nws_Pg-ePUJg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2012 19:41:26 +0800
From: Axel Lin <axel.lin@...il.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Liam Girdwood <lrg@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFT 3/4] regulator: wm831x-dcdc: Convert wm831x_buckv_ops
to set_voltage_sel and map_voltage
2012/6/13 Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>:
> On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 10:23:09AM +0800, Axel Lin wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: Axel Lin <axel.lin@...il.com>
>
> This patch is way more invasive than it needs to be (and therefore hard
> to check) because
>
>> - if (dcdc->dvs_gpio && dcdc->on_vsel == vsel)
>> + if (dcdc->dvs_gpio && dcdc->on_vsel == selector)
>
> you've replaced vsel with selector throughout the code.
Sorry. I don't get it.
In wm831x_buckv_set_voltage(), we call
wm831x_buckv_select_min_voltage() to get the selector ( named vsel).
In this patch, now we convert to set_voltage_sel:
static int wm831x_buckv_set_voltage_sel(struct regulator_dev *rdev,
unsigned selector)
So the selector now named 'selector'.
Or do you prefer I chenge the prototype to:
static int wm831x_buckv_set_voltage_sel(struct regulator_dev *rdev,
unsigned vsel)
Then the diff can be smaller.
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