[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1464599360.12124.0.camel@ingics.com>
Date: Mon, 30 May 2016 17:09:20 +0800
From: Axel Lin <axel.lin@...ics.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>,
Mikko Perttunen <mperttunen@...dia.com>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [RFT][PATCH v2] regulator: max8973: Fix setting ramp delay
Current code for .set_ramp_delay() rounds down the value written to
register, while the implementation of .set_voltage_time_sel() works on
original constraints (not rounded down).
Fix the logic in .set_ramp_delay and also remove unused ret_val variable.
Signed-off-by: Axel Lin <axel.lin@...ics.com>
---
v2: Update commit log base on Krzysztof's comment.
drivers/regulator/max8973-regulator.c | 16 ++++++----------
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/regulator/max8973-regulator.c b/drivers/regulator/max8973-regulator.c
index 08d2f13..3958f50 100644
--- a/drivers/regulator/max8973-regulator.c
+++ b/drivers/regulator/max8973-regulator.c
@@ -271,22 +271,18 @@ static int max8973_set_ramp_delay(struct regulator_dev *rdev,
struct max8973_chip *max = rdev_get_drvdata(rdev);
unsigned int control;
int ret;
- int ret_val;
/* Set ramp delay */
- if (ramp_delay < 25000) {
+ if (ramp_delay <= 12000)
control = MAX8973_RAMP_12mV_PER_US;
- ret_val = 12000;
- } else if (ramp_delay < 50000) {
+ else if (ramp_delay <= 25000)
control = MAX8973_RAMP_25mV_PER_US;
- ret_val = 25000;
- } else if (ramp_delay < 200000) {
+ else if (ramp_delay <= 50000)
control = MAX8973_RAMP_50mV_PER_US;
- ret_val = 50000;
- } else {
+ else if (ramp_delay <= 200000)
control = MAX8973_RAMP_200mV_PER_US;
- ret_val = 200000;
- }
+ else
+ return -EINVAL;
ret = regmap_update_bits(max->regmap, MAX8973_CONTROL1,
MAX8973_RAMP_MASK, control);
--
2.5.0
Powered by blists - more mailing lists