On Mon, 2016-02-01 at 09:25 +0100, John Crispin wrote:

On 28/01/2016 03:37, Henry Chen wrote:

quoted

Hi John,

On Wed, 2016-01-27 at 12:29 +0100, John Crispin wrote:

quoted

@@ -746,7 +786,7 @@ static int pwrap_init(struct pmic_wrapper *wrp)
 	pwrap_writel(wrp, 1, PWRAP_DIO_EN);
 
 	/* Read Test */
-	pwrap_read(wrp, PWRAP_DEW_READ_TEST, &rdata);
+	pwrap_dew_read(wrp, PWRAP_DEW_READ_TEST, &rdata);
 	if (rdata != PWRAP_DEW_READ_TEST_VAL) {
 		dev_err(wrp->dev, "Read test failed after switch to DIO mode: 0x%04x != 0x%04x\n",
 				PWRAP_DEW_READ_TEST_VAL, rdata);

@@ -759,12 +799,13 @@ static int pwrap_init(struct pmic_wrapper *wrp)
 		return ret;
 
 	/* Signature checking - using CRC */
-	if (pwrap_write(wrp, PWRAP_DEW_CRC_EN, 0x1))
+	if (pwrap_dew_write(wrp, PWRAP_DEW_CRC_EN, 0x1))
 		return -EFAULT;
 
 	pwrap_writel(wrp, 0x1, PWRAP_CRC_EN);
 	pwrap_writel(wrp, 0x0, PWRAP_SIG_MODE);
-	pwrap_writel(wrp, PWRAP_DEW_CRC_VAL, PWRAP_SIG_ADR);
+	pwrap_writel(wrp, wrp->slave->dew_regs[PWRAP_DEW_CRC_VAL],
+		     PWRAP_SIG_ADR);

It should be "pwrap_dew_write(wrp, PWRAP_DEW_CRC_VAL, PWRAP_SIG_ADR);",
right?

Henry

Hi Henry,

i stumbled across this aswell. however this DEW access is direct using
pwrap_writel() and not indirect pwrap_write(). hence this is correct.
the DEW wrapper only exists for pwrap_write() style access. this might
have been a bug in the original commit.

this patch however keeps the functionality as is.

	John

Hi John,

Oh. Sorry, there is no need to change, I just mixed up the parameter
val/reg of pwrap_writel() of this line.
Please keep original code, thanks.

Henry