[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b61e19bb-58ae-42ac-9863-f1149a812261@wanadoo.fr>
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2024 17:59:54 +0900
From: Vincent Mailhol <mailhol.vincent@...adoo.fr>
To: Sean Nyekjaer <sean@...nix.com>, Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>
Cc: linux-can@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH can-next v3 2/2] can: tcan4x5x: add option for selecting
nWKRQ voltage
Hi Sean,
I found the v3. I was a bit confused because it was hidden before the v2
in my mailbox: the active thread in v2 bump it to the top, thus
"shadowing" the v3.
On 12/11/2024 at 23:39, Sean Nyekjaer wrote:
> nWKRQ supports an output voltage of either the internal reference voltage
> (3.6V) or the reference voltage of the digital interface 0 - 6V (VIO).
> Add the devicetree option ti,nwkrq-voltage-vio to set it to VIO.
> Unset nWKRQ is kept at internal reference voltage.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sean Nyekjaer <sean@...nix.com>
Notwithstanding of bellow nitpick:
Reviewed-by: Vincent Mailhol <mailhol.vincent@...adoo.fr>
> ---
> drivers/net/can/m_can/tcan4x5x-core.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
> drivers/net/can/m_can/tcan4x5x.h | 2 ++
> 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/can/m_can/tcan4x5x-core.c b/drivers/net/can/m_can/tcan4x5x-core.c
> index 2f73bf3abad889c222f15c39a3d43de1a1cf5fbb..12a375c653cbd255b5dc85faf2f76de397a644ec 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/can/m_can/tcan4x5x-core.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/can/m_can/tcan4x5x-core.c
> @@ -92,6 +92,8 @@
> #define TCAN4X5X_MODE_STANDBY BIT(6)
> #define TCAN4X5X_MODE_NORMAL BIT(7)
>
> +#define TCAN4X5X_NWKRQ_VOLTAGE_VIO BIT(19)
> +
> #define TCAN4X5X_DISABLE_WAKE_MSK (BIT(31) | BIT(30))
> #define TCAN4X5X_DISABLE_INH_MSK BIT(9)
>
> @@ -267,6 +269,13 @@ static int tcan4x5x_init(struct m_can_classdev *cdev)
> if (ret)
> return ret;
>
> + if (tcan4x5x->nwkrq_voltage_vio) {
> + ret = regmap_set_bits(tcan4x5x->regmap, TCAN4X5X_CONFIG,
> + TCAN4X5X_NWKRQ_VOLTAGE_VIO);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> return ret;> }
>
> @@ -318,6 +327,15 @@ static const struct tcan4x5x_version_info
> return &tcan4x5x_versions[TCAN4X5X];
> }
>
> +static void tcan4x5x_get_dt_data(struct m_can_classdev *cdev)
> +{
> + struct tcan4x5x_priv *tcan4x5x = cdev_to_priv(cdev);
> + struct device_node *np = cdev->dev->of_node;
> +
> + if (of_property_read_bool(np, "ti,nwkrq-voltage-vio"))
> + tcan4x5x->nwkrq_voltage_vio = true;
Nitpick: you can directly assign the value. No need for the if.
tcan4x5x->nwkrq_voltage_vio =
of_property_read_bool(cdev->dev->of_node,
"ti,nwkrq-voltage-vio");
My personal preference is to not declare the np variable because it used
only once but instead directly use cdev->dev->of_node. See this as a
suggestion. If you prefer to keep as it is, OK for me :)
> +}
> +
> static int tcan4x5x_get_gpios(struct m_can_classdev *cdev,
> const struct tcan4x5x_version_info *version_info)
> {
> @@ -453,6 +471,8 @@ static int tcan4x5x_can_probe(struct spi_device *spi)
> goto out_power;
> }
>
> + tcan4x5x_get_dt_data(mcan_class);
> +
> tcan4x5x_check_wake(priv);
>
> ret = tcan4x5x_write_tcan_reg(mcan_class, TCAN4X5X_INT_EN, 0);
> diff --git a/drivers/net/can/m_can/tcan4x5x.h b/drivers/net/can/m_can/tcan4x5x.h
> index e62c030d3e1e5a713c997e7c8ecad4a44aff4e6a..203399d5e8ccf3fd7a26b54d8356fca9d398524c 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/can/m_can/tcan4x5x.h
> +++ b/drivers/net/can/m_can/tcan4x5x.h
> @@ -42,6 +42,8 @@ struct tcan4x5x_priv {
>
> struct tcan4x5x_map_buf map_buf_rx;
> struct tcan4x5x_map_buf map_buf_tx;
> +
> + bool nwkrq_voltage_vio;
> };
>
> static inline void
>
Yours sincerely,
Vincent Mailhol
Powered by blists - more mailing lists