Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755750Ab0ARRuT (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:50:19 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755725Ab0ARRuP (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:50:15 -0500 Received: from mail-fx0-f225.google.com ([209.85.220.225]:60923 "EHLO mail-fx0-f225.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755691Ab0ARRuL (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:50:11 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:from:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:content-type:date :message-id:mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding; b=LRwP7RJozSXOVGZmspjAE4rxtxUgSMqq0HZUvE5YiNn2ZBYwiBI2we0z5ABurKL7m6 b95ThNhuacsUzj883AUYqiq7bdE4tRcvuOLtAewhcE18+3Y4rz5EeiDKsOiFx4gm606B fhkSp7qHEmmedGGc2qbfBXJBGYpDA2rV+DIaM= Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: mc13783: consider Power Gates as digital regulators. From: Alberto Panizzo To: Mark Brown Cc: Uwe =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?= , Samuel Ortiz , Liam Girdwood , Sascha linux-arm , linux-kernel , linux-arm-kernel-infradead In-Reply-To: <20100118172002.GB6889@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main> References: <1263830523.3632.22.camel@realization> <20100118163212.GA32045@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main> <1263834473.3632.31.camel@realization> <20100118172002.GB6889@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 18:50:04 +0100 Message-ID: <1263837004.3632.52.camel@realization> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2321 Lines: 63 On lun, 2010-01-18 at 17:20 +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 06:07:53PM +0100, Alberto Panizzo wrote: > > > Something like this? > > if (mask & MC13783_REG_POWERMISC_PWGTSPI_M) { > > u32 new_state = (val & MC13783_REG_POWERMISC_PWGTSPI_M) ^ mask; > > > > mc13783_state_powermisc_pwgt = > > (mc13783_state_powermisc_pwgt & ~mask) | new_state; > > } > > Yes, that's clearer. > > > > > + if (ret) > > > > + return ret; > > > > + > > > > + valread = (valread & ~mask) | val; > > > > + > > > > + /* Re propose the stored state for Power Gates */ > > > > + valread = (valread & ~MC13783_REG_POWERMISC_PWGTSPI_M) | > > > > + mc13783_state_powermisc_pwgt; > > > > > > ...and this further mainpulation. > > > What is obscure in this? it is the same operation as the previous > > MC13783_REG_POWERMISC_PWGTSPI_M is the mask for PWGT1 and 2 bits and in > > mc13783_state_powermisc_pwgt there is the stored state for those two bits. > > Part of it is the fact that the first bit was almost completely opaque > but even so it would be less surprising if you first worked out the > value you wanted to set, then did whatever manipulation was required to > translate into the format that actually gets written. Maybe I not deep explained what's going on.. In POWERMISC register there are other controls bits than PWGTxEN that follow the convention of 1= enable 0= disable and for those bits read and write value are consistent: what is written could be read. So, for all these bits the way to manipulate is the normal: valread = (valread & ~mask) | val; where the mask can indicate the manipulation of not only one bit. As "mask" could contain manipulation of PWGTxEN bits, what I do is to overwrite those with the previously updated value: valread = (valread & ~MC13783_REG_POWERMISC_PWGTSPI_M) | mc13783_state_powermisc_pwgt; mc13783_state_powermisc_pwgt is maintained to be 0 in bits other than MC13783_REG_POWERMISC_PWGTSPI_M mask. I got me much clear? I misunderstood the question? Sorry my English please.. :) Thanks! Alberto. -- 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/