Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752219AbbFYOqe (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Jun 2015 10:46:34 -0400 Received: from mail-wi0-f171.google.com ([209.85.212.171]:38537 "EHLO mail-wi0-f171.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751712AbbFYOqc (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Jun 2015 10:46:32 -0400 Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2015 15:46:27 +0100 From: Lee Jones To: Vaibhav Hiremath Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, robh+dt@kernel.org, yizhang@marvell.com, Zhao Ye Subject: Re: [PATCH-v4 2/3] mfd: 88pm800: Set default interrupt clear method Message-ID: <20150625144627.GB23990@x1> References: <1435217189-19578-1-git-send-email-vaibhav.hiremath@linaro.org> <1435217189-19578-3-git-send-email-vaibhav.hiremath@linaro.org> <20150625102618.GC15013@x1> <558BE3D6.2010801@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <558BE3D6.2010801@linaro.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 4029 Lines: 134 On Thu, 25 Jun 2015, Vaibhav Hiremath wrote: > On Thursday 25 June 2015 03:56 PM, Lee Jones wrote: > >On Thu, 25 Jun 2015, Vaibhav Hiremath wrote: > > > >>As per the spec, bit 1 (INT_CLEAR_MODE) of reg addr 0xe > >>(page 0) controls the method of clearing interrupt > >>status of 88pm800 family of devices; > >> > >> 0: clear on read > >> 1: clear on write > >> > >>If pdata is not coming from board file, then set the > >>default irq clear method to "irq clear on write" > >> > >>Also, as suggested by "Lee Jones" renaming variable field > >>to appropriate name. > >> > >>Signed-off-by: Zhao Ye > >>Signed-off-by: Vaibhav Hiremath > >>--- > >> drivers/mfd/88pm800.c | 15 ++++++++++----- > >> include/linux/mfd/88pm80x.h | 6 ++++-- > >> 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > >> > >>diff --git a/drivers/mfd/88pm800.c b/drivers/mfd/88pm800.c > >>index 40fd014..e0cd7ad 100644 > >>--- a/drivers/mfd/88pm800.c > >>+++ b/drivers/mfd/88pm800.c [...] > >>+ PM800_WAKEUP2_INT_WRITE_CLEAR : PM800_WAKEUP2_INT_READ_CLEAR; > >>+ ret = regmap_update_bits(map, PM800_WAKEUP2, mask, irq_clr_mode); > >> > >> if (ret < 0) > >> goto out; > >>@@ -514,6 +515,7 @@ static int device_800_init(struct pm80x_chip *chip, > >> } > >> > >> chip->regmap_irq_chip = &pm800_irq_chip; > >>+ chip->irq_clr_on_wr = pdata->irq_clr_on_wr; > > > >You have protection around pdata everywhere else in the file, I > >suggest you supply some here too. > > > > Actually it is not really needed, as the PATCH 1/1 introduces > > > if (!pdata && !np) { > dev_err(&client->dev, > "pm80x requires platform data or of_node\n"); > return -EINVAL; > } > > if (!pdata && !np) { > dev_err(&client->dev, > "pm80x requires platform data or of_node\n"); > return -EINVAL; > } > > > So there is no way you can have pdata = NULL beyond this point. I saw that. I want you to remove that too. [...] > >>--- a/include/linux/mfd/88pm80x.h > >>+++ b/include/linux/mfd/88pm80x.h > >>@@ -77,6 +77,8 @@ enum { > >> #define PM800_WAKEUP2 (0x0E) > >> #define PM800_WAKEUP2_INV_INT (1 << 0) > >> #define PM800_WAKEUP2_INT_CLEAR (1 << 1) > >>+#define PM800_WAKEUP2_INT_READ_CLEAR (0 << 1) > >>+#define PM800_WAKEUP2_INT_WRITE_CLEAR (1 << 1) > >> #define PM800_WAKEUP2_INT_MASK (1 << 2) > > > >Use the BIT() macro. > > > > I thought about this, but the whole file doesn't use it, so I also > chose not to. Then the whole file needs moving over. Patches accepted. > >> #define PM800_POWER_UP_LOG (0x10) > >>@@ -300,7 +302,7 @@ struct pm80x_chip { > >> struct regmap_irq_chip_data *irq_data; > >> int type; > >> int irq; > >>- int irq_mode; > >>+ int irq_clr_on_wr; /* '1': Clear on write, '0': Clear on read*/ > > > >Whitespace issue. > > Didn't see any...and I also ran checkpatch. You have no space before the '*/'. > >Shouldn't this be a bool? > > > > Just was not sure about any older board file interface. > Ideally it should be bool only. Right. > >Actually even better, I would define; CLR_ON_WRITE and CLR_ON_READ, > >and call the variable irq_clear_method, or something. > > > >Much clearer that way I think. > > > > We have slowly decided to almost hardcode it to one value if there is > no board file. I feel we should just keep it to simple. > > If you still insist, I can implement. I like clarity and by your own admission (by warranting an additional comment) it's not clear. Please make it as clear as you can. -- Lee Jones Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/