linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 10/15] power: supply: bq24190_charger: Use extcon to determine ilimit, 5v boost

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: <1489772011.19767.75.camel@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Fri, 17 Mar 2017 19:33:31 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
        Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
        Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>,
        MyungJoo Ham <myungjoo.ham@...sung.com>,
        Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>
Cc:     linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>,
        linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/15] power: supply: bq24190_charger: Use extcon to
 determine ilimit, 5v boost

On Fri, 2017-03-17 at 10:55 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Add support for monitoring an extcon device with SDP/CDP/DCP and HOST
> cables and adjust ilimit and enable/disable the 5v boost converter
> accordingly. This is necessary on systems where the PSEL pin is
> hardwired
> high and ILIM needs to be set by software based on the detected
> charger
> type.
> 

>  config CHARGER_BQ24190
>  	tristate "TI BQ24190 battery charger driver"
>  	depends on I2C

> +	depends on EXTCON

I dunno what is preferred here, but if we would like to keep
compatibility with previous configurations "select" should be used over
"depends on".

> +static void bq24190_extcon_work(struct work_struct *work)
> +{
> +	struct bq24190_dev_info *bdi =
> +		container_of(work, struct bq24190_dev_info,
> extcon_work);
> +	int ret, iinlim = 0;
> +
> +	if (extcon_get_state(bdi->extcon, EXTCON_CHG_USB_SDP) == 1)
> +		iinlim = 500000;
> +	else if (extcon_get_state(bdi->extcon, EXTCON_CHG_USB_CDP) ==
> 1 ||
> +		 extcon_get_state(bdi->extcon, EXTCON_CHG_USB_ACA) ==
> 1)
> +		iinlim = 1500000;
> +	else if (extcon_get_state(bdi->extcon, EXTCON_CHG_USB_DCP) ==
> 1)
> +		iinlim = 2000000;
> +

> +	if (iinlim) {

Could be possible to call below unconditionally here (use 0)?

> +		ret = bq24190_set_field_val(bdi, BQ24190_REG_ISC,
> +				BQ24190_REG_ISC_IINLIM_MASK,
> +				BQ24190_REG_ISC_IINLIM_SHIFT,
> +				bq24190_iinlim_values,
> +				ARRAY_SIZE(bq24190_iinlim_values),
> +				iinlim);
> +		if (ret)
> +			dev_err(bdi->dev, "Can't set IINLIM: %d\n",
> ret);
> +	}

Perhaps make above as a helper?

In that case no need for "if (iinlim)" and perhaps switch-case might be
used instead of if-else-if (latter is up to you).

-- 
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Intel Finland Oy