Re: [PATCH 3/4] mfd: mt6360: Fix flow which is used to check ic exist

Matthias Brugger [off-list ref] 於 2020年7月10日 週五 下午10:25寫道：

On 07/07/2020 12:30, Gene Chen wrote:

quoted

From: Gene Chen <redacted>

Fix flow which is used to check ic exist

Signed-off-by: Gene Chen <redacted>
---
  drivers/mfd/mt6360-core.c  | 28 +++++++++++++++++++---------
  include/linux/mfd/mt6360.h |  8 ++++----
  2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/mfd/mt6360-core.c b/drivers/mfd/mt6360-core.c
index 2dd5918..4bb2949 100644
--- a/drivers/mfd/mt6360-core.c
+++ b/drivers/mfd/mt6360-core.c

@@ -293,6 +293,23 @@ static const struct mfd_cell mt6360_devs[] = {
                  NULL, 0, 0, "mediatek,mt6360-tcpc"),
  };

+static int mt6360_check_vendor_info(struct mt6360_data *data)
+{
+     u32 info;
+     int ret;
+
+     ret = regmap_read(data->regmap, MT6360_REG_PMU_DEVINFO, &info);
+     if (ret < 0)
+             return ret;
+
+     if ((info & MT6360_CHIPVEN_MASK) != MT6360_CHIPVEN_VAL)
+             return -ENODEV;
+
+     data->chip_rev = info & MT6360_CHIPREV_MASK;
+
+     return 0;
+}
+
  static const unsigned short mt6360_slave_addr[MT6360_SLAVE_MAX] = {
      MT6360_PMU_SLAVEID,
      MT6360_PMIC_SLAVEID,

@@ -303,7 +320,6 @@ static const unsigned short mt6360_slave_addr[MT6360_SLAVE_MAX] = {
  static int mt6360_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
  {
      struct mt6360_data *data;
-     unsigned int reg_data;
      int i, ret;

      data = devm_kzalloc(&client->dev, sizeof(*data), GFP_KERNEL);

@@ -319,16 +335,10 @@ static int mt6360_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
              return PTR_ERR(data->regmap);
      }

-     ret = regmap_read(data->regmap, MT6360_PMU_DEV_INFO, &reg_data);
+     ret = mt6360_check_vendor_info(data);
      if (ret) {
-             dev_err(&client->dev, "Device not found\n");
-             return ret;
-     }
-
-     data->chip_rev = reg_data & CHIP_REV_MASK;
-     if (data->chip_rev != CHIP_VEN_MT6360) {

Why not only applying the MASK here instead of put this all in a new function?

I think merge the ic check flow into function is well-organized.
if not, i can restore the same as before.

quoted

              dev_err(&client->dev, "Device not supported\n");
-             return -ENODEV;
+             return ret;
      }

      ret = devm_regmap_add_irq_chip(&client->dev, data->regmap, client->irq,

diff --git a/include/linux/mfd/mt6360.h b/include/linux/mfd/mt6360.h
index 9fc6718..5ec0f5d 100644
--- a/include/linux/mfd/mt6360.h
+++ b/include/linux/mfd/mt6360.h

@@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ struct mt6360_data {
  };

  /* PMU register defininition */
-#define MT6360_PMU_DEV_INFO                  (0x00)
+#define MT6360_REG_PMU_DEVINFO                       (0x00)
  #define MT6360_PMU_CORE_CTRL1                       (0x01)
  #define MT6360_PMU_RST1                             (0x02)
  #define MT6360_PMU_CRCEN                    (0x03)

@@ -233,8 +233,8 @@ struct mt6360_data {
  #define MT6360_IRQ_REGNUM   16
  #define MT6360_IRQ_RETRIG   BIT(2)

-#define CHIP_VEN_MASK                                (0xF0)
-#define CHIP_VEN_MT6360                              (0x50)
-#define CHIP_REV_MASK                                (0x0F)
+#define MT6360_CHIPVEN_MASK                  (0xF0)
+#define MT6360_CHIPVEN_VAL                   (0x50)
+#define MT6360_CHIPREV_MASK                  (0x0F)

Same here as in the other patches. Don't just rename defines if there is no good
reason.

Is easy to read a good reason to rename it?
if not, i can restore the same as before.

Regards,
Matthias

quoted

  #endif /* __MT6360_H__ */

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel