[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZRhKAWYBLcBZHc73@google.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2023 09:17:05 -0700
From: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
To: Fenglin Wu <quic_fenglinw@...cinc.com>
Cc: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
agross@...nel.org, andersson@...nel.org,
Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
linux-input@...r.kernel.org, quic_collinsd@...cinc.com,
quic_subbaram@...cinc.com, quic_kamalw@...cinc.com,
jestar@....qualcomm.com, Luca Weiss <luca.weiss@...rphone.com>
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v6 3/3] input: pm8xxx-vibrator: add new SPMI
vibrator support
On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 10:54:45AM +0800, Fenglin Wu wrote:
>
>
> On 9/24/2023 3:07 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> > > +
> > > + switch (vib->data->hw_type) {
> > > + case SSBI_VIB:
> > > mask = SSBI_VIB_DRV_LEVEL_MASK;
> > > shift = SSBI_VIB_DRV_SHIFT;
> > > + break;
> > > + case SPMI_VIB:
> > > + mask = SPMI_VIB_DRV_LEVEL_MASK;
> > > + shift = SPMI_VIB_DRV_SHIFT;
> > > + break;
> > > + case SPMI_VIB_GEN2:
> > > + mask = SPMI_VIB_GEN2_DRV_MASK;
> > > + shift = SPMI_VIB_GEN2_DRV_SHIFT;
> > > + break;
> > > + default:
> > > + return -EINVAL;
> > Could you please move the switch to the previous patch? Then it would
> > be more obvious that you are just adding the SPMI_VIB_GEN2 here.
> >
> > Other than that LGTM.
>
> Sure, I can move the switch to the previous refactoring patch.
Actually, the idea of having a const "reg" or "chip", etc. structure is
to avoid this kind of runtime checks based on hardware type and instead
use common computation. I believe you need to move mask and shift into
the chip-specific structure and avoid defining hw_type.
Thanks.
--
Dmitry
Powered by blists - more mailing lists