Hi!

Introduce the lm3697 LED driver for
backlighting and display.

Datasheet location:
http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/lm3697.pdf

Signed-off-by: Dan Murphy <redacted>

+
+#define LM3697_HVLED1_2_3_A		0
+#define LM3697_HVLED1_B_HVLED2_3_A	1
+#define LM3697_HVLED2_B_HVLED1_3_A	2
+#define LM3697_HVLED1_2_B_HVLED3_A	3
+#define LM3697_HVLED3_B_HVLED1_2_A	4
+#define LM3697_HVLED1_3_B_HVLED2_A	5
+#define LM3697_HVLED1_A_HVLED2_3_B	6
+#define LM3697_HVLED1_2_3_B		7

That's rather long and verbose way to describe a bitmap, right?

+static const struct regmap_config lm3697_regmap_config = {
+	.reg_bits = 8,
+	.val_bits = 8,
+
+	.max_register = LM3697_CTRL_ENABLE,
+	.reg_defaults = lm3697_reg_defs,
+	.num_reg_defaults = ARRAY_SIZE(lm3697_reg_defs),
+	.cache_type = REGCACHE_RBTREE,
+};

Is rbtree good idea? You don't have that many registers.

+static int lm3697_init(struct lm3697 *priv)
+{
+	int ret;
+

....

+		regmap_write(priv->regmap, LM3697_RESET, LM3697_SW_RESET);

No error checking required here?

+	if (priv->control_bank_config < LM3697_HVLED1_2_3_A ||
+	    priv->control_bank_config > LM3697_HVLED1_2_3_B) {
+		dev_err(&priv->client->dev, "Control bank configuration is out of range\n");
+		ret = -EINVAL;
+		goto out;
+	}
+
+	device_for_each_child_node(priv->dev, child) {
+		led = &priv->leds[i];
+
+		ret = fwnode_property_read_u32(child, "reg", &led->control_bank);
+		if (ret) {
+			dev_err(&priv->client->dev, "reg DT property missing\n");
+			goto child_out;
+		}
+
+		fwnode_property_read_string(child, "linux,default-trigger",
+					    &led->led_dev.default_trigger);
+
+		ret = fwnode_property_read_string(child, "label", &name);
+		if (ret)
+			snprintf(led->label, sizeof(led->label),
+				"%s::", priv->client->name);
+		else
+			snprintf(led->label, sizeof(led->label),
+				 "%s:%s", priv->client->name, name);
+
+
+		led->priv = priv;
+		led->led_dev.name = led->label;
+		led->led_dev.brightness_set_blocking = lm3697_brightness_set;
+
+		ret = devm_led_classdev_register(priv->dev, &led->led_dev);
+		if (ret) {
+			dev_err(&priv->client->dev, "led register err: %d\n", ret);
+			goto child_out;
+		}
+
+		if (priv->control_bank_config == LM3697_HVLED1_2_3_A ||
+		    priv->control_bank_config == LM3697_HVLED1_2_3_B)
+			goto child_out;

This checks if we have just one bank, I see it. Should it also check
the led actually uses the correct bank?

+		i++;
+		fwnode_handle_put(child);
+	}
+
+child_out:
+	fwnode_handle_put(child);

Is not the fwnode_handle_put() done twice for non-error case?

+	ret = lm3697_init(led);
+	if (ret)
+		return ret;
+
+	return ret;
+}

The if is not needed here.

+static int lm3697_remove(struct i2c_client *client)
+{
+	struct lm3697 *led = i2c_get_clientdata(client);
+	int ret;
+
+	ret = regmap_update_bits(led->regmap, LM3697_CTRL_ENABLE,
+				 LM3697_CTRL_A_B_EN, 0);
+	if (ret) {
+		dev_err(&led->client->dev, "Failed to disable regulator\n");
+		return ret;

Misleading, this does nothing with regulators.

									Pavel

-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html