Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20200328001154.17313-1-sravanhome@gmail.com> <20200328001154.17313-5-sravanhome@gmail.com>
 <CAHp75VefP3oPyRJ=Z9Y5Wv3rSc-nJdKFLJ60YLdUbP5dFikS+w@mail.gmail.com> <36892440-99b2-10e8-1d7c-dd8c97e03a39@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <36892440-99b2-10e8-1d7c-dd8c97e03a39@gmail.com>
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 28 Mar 2020 20:44:14 +0200
Message-ID: <CAHp75VdAfiSjkHhTnghZ__WAJCJTGSWBprJBPNmpkxZTjZuVgQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/5] power: supply: Add support for mps mp2629 battery charger
To:     saravanan sekar <sravanhome@gmail.com>
Cc:     Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>,
        Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@gmx.de>,
        Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>,
        Peter Meerwald <pmeerw@pmeerw.net>,
        Sebastian Reichel <sre@kernel.org>,
        devicetree <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-iio <linux-iio@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 1:29 PM saravanan sekar <sravanhome@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 28/03/20 12:02 pm, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 2:12 AM Saravanan Sekar <sravanhome@gmail.com> wrote:

...

> >> +       val->intval = (rval * props[fld].step) + props[fld].min;
> > Too many parentheses.
> >
> > ...
> >
> >> +       return ((psp == POWER_SUPPLY_PROP_PRECHARGE_CURRENT) ||
> >> +               (psp == POWER_SUPPLY_PROP_CHARGE_TERM_CURRENT) ||
> >> +               (psp == POWER_SUPPLY_PROP_CONSTANT_CHARGE_CURRENT) ||
> >> +               (psp == POWER_SUPPLY_PROP_CONSTANT_CHARGE_VOLTAGE));
> > Ditto.
> I think I misunderstood you previous review comment "Redundant
> parentheses", no sure what is the expectation

(At least) surrounding pair is not needed, return (a == b) || (c == d);

> > ...
> >
> >> +       return ((psp == POWER_SUPPLY_PROP_INPUT_VOLTAGE_LIMIT) ||
> >> +               (psp == POWER_SUPPLY_PROP_INPUT_CURRENT_LIMIT));
> > Ditto.

...

> >> +       struct power_supply_config psy_cfg = {NULL};
> > { 0 }
> >
> NULL to make compiler happy.

Hmm... Can you share warning / error compiler issued in 0 case?

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko