by Sebastian Reichel

[permalink] [raw]

Subject: Re: [PATCHv7 10/11] regulator: expose regulator_find_closest_bigger

Hi Mark and Liam,

On Tue, Mar 07, 2023 at 04:36:16PM +0100, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> Expose and document the table lookup logic used by
> regulator_set_ramp_delay_regmap, so that it can be
> reused for devices that cannot be configured via
> regulator_set_ramp_delay_regmap.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Reichel <[email protected]>
> ---

Can you please Ack and the following patch?
(they needs to go through MFD tree)

Thanks,

-- Sebastian

> drivers/regulator/helpers.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++----
> include/linux/regulator/driver.h | 2 ++
> 2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/regulator/helpers.c b/drivers/regulator/helpers.c
> index ad2237a95572..586f42e378ee 100644
> --- a/drivers/regulator/helpers.c
> +++ b/drivers/regulator/helpers.c
> @@ -902,8 +902,21 @@ bool regulator_is_equal(struct regulator *reg1, struct regulator *reg2)
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(regulator_is_equal);
>
> -static int find_closest_bigger(unsigned int target, const unsigned int *table,
> - unsigned int num_sel, unsigned int *sel)
> +/**
> + * regulator_find_closest_bigger - helper to find offset in ramp delay table
> + *
> + * @target: targeted ramp_delay
> + * @table: table with supported ramp delays
> + * @num_sel: number of entries in the table
> + * @sel: Pointer to store table offset
> + *
> + * This is the internal helper used by regulator_set_ramp_delay_regmap to
> + * map ramp delay to register value. It should only be used directly if
> + * regulator_set_ramp_delay_regmap cannot handle a specific device setup
> + * (e.g. because the value is split over multiple registers).
> + */
> +int regulator_find_closest_bigger(unsigned int target, const unsigned int *table,
> + unsigned int num_sel, unsigned int *sel)
> {
> unsigned int s, tmp, max, maxsel = 0;
> bool found = false;
> @@ -933,6 +946,7 @@ static int find_closest_bigger(unsigned int target, const unsigned int *table,
>
> return 0;
> }
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(regulator_find_closest_bigger);
>
> /**
> * regulator_set_ramp_delay_regmap - set_ramp_delay() helper
> @@ -951,8 +965,8 @@ int regulator_set_ramp_delay_regmap(struct regulator_dev *rdev, int ramp_delay)
> if (WARN_ON(!rdev->desc->n_ramp_values || !rdev->desc->ramp_delay_table))
> return -EINVAL;
>
> - ret = find_closest_bigger(ramp_delay, rdev->desc->ramp_delay_table,
> - rdev->desc->n_ramp_values, &sel);
> + ret = regulator_find_closest_bigger(ramp_delay, rdev->desc->ramp_delay_table,
> + rdev->desc->n_ramp_values, &sel);
>
> if (ret) {
> dev_warn(rdev_get_dev(rdev),
> diff --git a/include/linux/regulator/driver.h b/include/linux/regulator/driver.h
> index d3b4a3d4514a..c6ef7d68eb9a 100644
> --- a/include/linux/regulator/driver.h
> +++ b/include/linux/regulator/driver.h
> @@ -758,6 +758,8 @@ int regulator_set_current_limit_regmap(struct regulator_dev *rdev,
> int min_uA, int max_uA);
> int regulator_get_current_limit_regmap(struct regulator_dev *rdev);
> void *regulator_get_init_drvdata(struct regulator_init_data *reg_init_data);
> +int regulator_find_closest_bigger(unsigned int target, const unsigned int *table,
> + unsigned int num_sel, unsigned int *sel);
> int regulator_set_ramp_delay_regmap(struct regulator_dev *rdev, int ramp_delay);
> int regulator_sync_voltage_rdev(struct regulator_dev *rdev);
>
> --
> 2.39.2
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, send mail to [email protected].

Attachments:

(No filename) (3.42 kB)
signature.asc (833.00 B)
Download all attachments

2023-03-16 11:22:20

On Tuesday, 7 March 2023 16:36:06 CEST Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> The Rockchip RK3588 Evaluation Boards as well as the Rock 5
> boards and probably most other RK3588 boards use SPI connected
> RK806 PMICs. Downstream this is handled by a new driver, but
> apart from being SPI connected this chip is quite similar to
> the other Rockchip PMICs (and RK806 is promoted to also support
> I2C). Thus this series instead updates the RK808 driver(s).

I don't know if it's relevant or useful, but I tested whether this patch set
would cause a regression on the Rock64 (rk3328), Quartz64 Model A and Quartz64
Model B (both rk3566) and I can say that it does NOT cause a regression.

If it is relevant or useful, feel free to add my
Tested-by: Diederik de Haas <[email protected]>

Attachments:

signature.asc (235.00 B)
This is a digitally signed message part.