Re: [PATCH v2 11/13] regulator: hi6421v600-regulator: move it from staging
From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Date: 2021-01-18 13:58:08
Also in:
lkml
On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 02:28:12PM +0100, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
index f385146d2bd1..3b23ad56b31a 100644--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/hisilicon,hi6421-spmi-pmic.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/hisilicon,hi6421-spmi-pmic.yaml@@ -60,6 +60,8 @@ required: - reg - regulators +additionalProperties: false + examples: - | /* pmic properties */
Why is this part of this patch?
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 +// +// Device driver for regulators in Hisi IC +// +// Copyright (c) 2013 Linaro Ltd. +// Copyright (c) 2011 Hisilicon. +//
This looks like it needs an update.
+// This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify +// it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as +// published by the Free Software Foundation. +// +// This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, +// but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of +// MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the +// GNU General Public License for more details.
This boilerplate can be removed.
+static int hi6421_spmi_regulator_enable(struct regulator_dev *rdev)
+{
+ struct hi6421_spmi_reg_info *sreg = rdev_get_drvdata(rdev);
+ struct hi6421_spmi_pmic *pmic = sreg->pmic;
+ int ret;
+
+ /* cannot enable more than one regulator at one time */
+ mutex_lock(&sreg->enable_mutex);
+ usleep_range(HISI_REGS_ENA_PROTECT_TIME,
+ HISI_REGS_ENA_PROTECT_TIME + 1000);
+
+ /* set enable register */
+ ret = hi6421_spmi_pmic_rmw(pmic, rdev->desc->enable_reg,
+ rdev->desc->enable_mask,
+ rdev->desc->enable_mask);If for some reason the PMIC is sufficiently fragile to need a delay between enables it's not clear why the driver is doing it before enabling rather than after, presumably there's issues with the regulator ramping up and stabalising its output
+ /* set enable register to 0 */ + return hi6421_spmi_pmic_rmw(pmic, rdev->desc->enable_reg, + rdev->desc->enable_mask, 0);
I'm not sure all these comments are adding anything.
+ if (unlikely(selector >= rdev->desc->n_voltages)) + return -EINVAL;
This should not be a hot path that needs an unlikely() annotation.
+static unsigned int
+hi6421_spmi_regulator_get_optimum_mode(struct regulator_dev *rdev,
+ int input_uV, int output_uV,
+ int load_uA)
+{
+ struct hi6421_spmi_reg_info *sreg = rdev_get_drvdata(rdev);
+
+ if (load_uA || ((unsigned int)load_uA > sreg->eco_uA))
+ return REGULATOR_MODE_NORMAL;This means that for *any* load at all we select NORMAL - I'm not convinced this is intentional?
Attachments
- signature.asc [application/pgp-signature] 488 bytes