[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200529174210.GF17541@heinlein>
Date: Fri, 29 May 2020 12:42:10 -0500
From: Patrick Williams <patrick@...cx.xyz>
To: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc: Manikandan Elumalai <manikandan.hcl.ers.epl@...il.com>,
linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org, linux-aspeed@...ts.ozlabs.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, openbmc@...ts.ozlabs.org,
manikandan.e@....com, saipsdasari@...com, patrickw3@...com,
vijaykhemka@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] hwmon:(adm1275) Enable adm1278 ADM1278_TEMP1_EN
Hi Guenter,
Thanks for the initial look at this.
One question for you below...
On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 10:30:16AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 5/29/20 5:46 AM, Manikandan Elumalai wrote:
> > + /* Enable TEMP1 by default */
> > + config |= ADM1278_TEMP1_EN;
> > + ret = i2c_smbus_write_byte_data(client,
> > + ADM1275_PMON_CONFIG,
> > + config);
> > + if (ret < 0) {
> > + dev_err(&client->dev,
> > + "Failed to enable temperature config\n");
> > + return -ENODEV;
> > + }
>
> This can be handled in a single operation, together with ADM1278_VOUT_EN
> below. There is no need for two separate write operations.
I don't know if you noticed here but the change ends up enabling
TEMP1_EN in all cases. Is this acceptable? If not, do you have any
preference on how it is selected for enablement?
> > /* Enable VOUT if not enabled (it is disabled by default) */
> > if (!(config & ADM1278_VOUT_EN)) {
> > @@ -681,9 +697,6 @@ static int adm1275_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
> > }
> > }
> >
> > - if (config & ADM1278_TEMP1_EN)
> > - info->func[0] |=
> > - PMBUS_HAVE_TEMP | PMBUS_HAVE_STATUS_TEMP;
> > if (config & ADM1278_VIN_EN)
> > info->func[0] |= PMBUS_HAVE_VIN;
> > break;
> >
>
--
Patrick Williams
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists