[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-id: <531818D6.3080500@samsung.com>
Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2014 07:42:30 +0100
From: Robert Baldyga <r.baldyga@...sung.com>
To: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
Cc: sameo@...ux.intel.com, lee.jones@...aro.org,
myungjoo.ham@...sung.com, cw00.choi@...sung.com,
cooloney@...il.com, rpurdie@...ys.net, dbaryshkov@...il.com,
dwmw2@...radead.org, lgirdwood@...il.com, broonie@...nel.org,
a.zummo@...ertech.it, paul.gortmaker@...driver.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-input@...r.kernel.org,
linux-leds@...r.kernel.org, rtc-linux@...glegroups.com,
m.szyprowski@...sung.com, k.kozlowski@...sung.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mfd: max8997: use regmap to access registers
Hi,
On 03/05/2014 07:54 PM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> Hi Robert,
>
> On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 03:58:17PM +0100, Robert Baldyga wrote:
>>
>> -int max8997_write_reg(struct i2c_client *i2c, u8 reg, u8 value)
>> +int max8997_write_reg(struct regmap *map, u8 reg, u8 value)
>
> Why don't you make read/write reg to take struct max8997_dev as argument
> instead of regmap? regmap seems to be the current implementation du jur,
> but that is core's detail, functions do not need to care.
>
> Thanks.
>
It's because there are few regmaps in max8997_dev, and read/write reg
functions has no way to check which regmap should be used. I think it
would be clearer if I remove this functions and use regmap_read and
regmap_write instead, because there is no particular purpose for them.
Best regards
Robert Baldyga
Samsung R&D Institute Poland
--
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