[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b469d35b-ca39-2a99-1e86-420edcabf1ac@ti.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2019 12:57:23 -0500
From: Dan Murphy <dmurphy@...com>
To: Jacek Anaszewski <jacek.anaszewski@...il.com>, <pavel@....cz>
CC: <linux-leds@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v14 13/19] leds: lp55xx: Add multicolor framework support
to lp55xx
Jacek
On 10/22/19 12:41 PM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
> Dan,
>
> On 10/22/19 6:37 PM, Dan Murphy wrote:
>> Jacek
>>
>> On 10/18/19 4:56 PM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
>>> On 10/18/19 11:48 PM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
>>>> Dan,
>>> + ret = lp5xx_parse_channel_child(child, cfg, i);
>>>> I went into details of this parsing and finally came up with
>>>> the code which is a bit greater in size, but IMHO cleaner.
>>>> Note changes in variable naming. It is not even compile-tested.
>>>>
>>>> static int lp55xx_parse_common_child(struct device_node *np,
>>>> struct lp55xx_led_config *cfg,
>>>> int led_number, int *chan_nr)
>>>> {
>>>> int ret;
>>>>
>>>> of_property_read_string(np, "chan-name",
>>>> &cfg[led_number].name);
>>>> of_property_read_u8(np, "led-cur",
>>>> &cfg[led_number].led_current);
>>>> of_property_read_u8(np, "max-cur",
>>>> &cfg[led_number].max_current);
>>>>
>>>> ret = of_property_read_u32(np, "reg", chan_nr);
>>>> if (ret)
>>>> return ret;
>>>>
>>>> if (chan_nr < 0 || chan_nr > cfg->max_chan_nr) /* side note:
>>>> new
>>>> max_chan_nr property needed in cfg */
>>>> return -EINVAL;
>>>>
>>>> return 0;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> static int lp55xx_parse_mutli_led_child(struct device_node *np,
>>>> struct lp55xx_led_config *cfg,
>>>> int child_number,
>>>> int color_number)
>>>> {
>>>> int chan_nr, color_id;
>>>>
>>>> ret = lp55xx_parse_common_child(child, cfg, child_number,
>>>> color_number,
>>>> &chan_nr);
>>>> if (ret)
>>>> return ret;
>>>>
>>>> ret = of_property_read_u32(child, "color", &color_id);
>>>> if (ret)
>>>> return ret;
>>>>
>>>> cfg[child_number].color_components[color_number].color_id =
>>>> color_id;
>>>> cfg[child_number].color_components[color_number].output_num =
>>>> chan_nr;
>>>> set_bit(color_id, &cfg[child_number].available_colors);
>>>>
>>>> return 0;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> staitc int lp55xx_parse_mutli_led(struct device_node *np,
>>>> struct lp55xx_led_config *cfg,
>>>> int child_number)
>>>> {
>>>> struct device_node *child;
>>>> int num_colors = 0, i = 0;
>>> s/, i = 0//
>>>
>>>> for_each_child_of_node(np, child) {
>>>> ret = lp55xx_parse_mutli_led_child(child, cfg,
>>>> num_colors,
>>>> child_number, i))
>>> Replace above call with below:
>>>
>>> ret = lp55xx_parse_mutli_led_child(child, cfg, child_number, num_colors);
>>>
>> I applied your DT parser patch from the v13 series. Which eliminates
>> this comment correct?
> Yes, it contains this fix.
>
OK I added your patch and it broke a lot of the DT parsing for the LP55xx.
I would prefer to stick with the original code without having to
re-write this again.
Dan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists