Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 08 Jul 2015 17:52:11 +0530 | From | Vaibhav Hiremath <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH-V5 3/4] mfd: 88pm800: Set default interrupt clear method |
| |
On Tuesday 07 July 2015 08:27 PM, Lee Jones wrote: > On Tue, 07 Jul 2015, Vaibhav Hiremath wrote: > >> >> >> On Tuesday 07 July 2015 06:24 PM, Lee Jones wrote: >>> On Tue, 07 Jul 2015, Vaibhav Hiremath wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tuesday 07 July 2015 04:48 PM, Vaibhav Hiremath wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tuesday 07 July 2015 04:42 PM, Lee Jones wrote: >>>>>> On Tue, 07 Jul 2015, Vaibhav Hiremath wrote: >>>>>>> On Tuesday 07 July 2015 04:10 PM, Lee Jones wrote: >>>>>>>> On Tue, 07 Jul 2015, Vaibhav Hiremath wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Tuesday 07 July 2015 12:59 PM, Lee Jones wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 29 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 <zhaoy@marvell.com> >>>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Vaibhav Hiremath <vaibhav.hiremath@linaro.org> >>>>>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>>>>> drivers/mfd/88pm800.c | 15 ++++++++++----- >>>>>>>>>>> include/linux/mfd/88pm80x.h | 10 ++++++++-- >>>>>>>>>>> 2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) >>>>>>>>>>> >> >> <snip> >> >>>>> >>>>> Yes certainly, this is another option (rather preferred one). >>>>> >>>>> But to be consistent with other's I proposed this, please refer to the >>>>> fn device_800_init(), where all xxx_init() are taking 2 arguments, and >>>>> second argument is pdata. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> There is room for cleanup, I agree. >>>>> I can put this too in the next cleanup series. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Note that this is init function, called from probe. >>>> >>>> So both approach looks ok to me. >>> >>> Please clean up the other. Function and put it at the front of the >>> set when you re-submit. >>> >> >> Sorry for dumb question here :) >> I did not understand what do you mean by "in front of the set"? >> >> You want to see all the patches into one single series? >> Or >> have separate series, >> 1. existing DT addition series >> 2. new clean-up series > > [PATCH v6 0/5] mfd: 88pm800: Add Device tree support > ├>[PATCH v6 1/5] mfd: 88pm800: Obtain pdata from 'device' rather than passing as parameter > ├>[PATCH v6 2/5] mfd: 88pm800: Add device tree support > ├>[PATCH v6 3/5] mfd: 88pm800: Remove unnecessary protection around pdata > ├>[PATCH v6 4/5] mfd: 88pm800: Set default interrupt clear method > ├>[PATCH v6 5/5] mfd: devicetree: bindings: Add new 88pm800 mfd binding >
Thanks Lee,
Just FYI, I have done some reordering here, because of obvious reasons.
Submitting patches shortly...
Thanks, Vaibhav
| |