lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Apr]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/4] regulator: tps65910: update type for regmap
From
Date
On Wed, 2012-04-18 at 13:03 -0700, Rhyland Klein wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-04-18 at 02:25 -0700, Mark Brown wrote:
> > * PGP Signed by an unknown key
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 06:00:26PM -0700, Rhyland Klein wrote:
> > > When accessing the regmap via the read/write functions, we need to use a
> > > unsigned int * instead of a u8 * otherwise corruption will occur.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Rhyland Klein <rklein@nvidia.com>
> >
> > > static inline int tps65910_read(struct tps65910_reg *pmic, u8 reg)
> > > {
> > > - u8 val;
> > > + unsigned int val;
> > > int err;
> > >
> > > err = pmic->mfd->read(pmic->mfd, reg, 1, &val);
> >
> > Ugh, this interface is just broken all round - there's absolutely no
> > type safety here and all users of these functions will be broken (a
> > similar issue applies on write). It's much better to fix this for 3.4
> > by converting the core code to use regmap_raw_ functions which take
> > native formatted data for the device like the function driver API
> > actually expects.
>
> Which interface are you saying is broken? The regmap interface or the
> one internal to the tps65910 code?
>
> >
> > Looking at the MFD code the fix for 3.5 should at the very least involve
> > making the functions take typed pointers, though given the way they're
> > implemented right now with direct references in the subdevices I'd also
> > consider just having the subdevices uses regmap directly as the wrappers
> > are just adding an opportunity for error (the bit operations could be
> > converted into static inlines in the header too).
> >
>
> So to be clear... Your recommendation is to change the tps65910 code to
> remove the common read/write callbacks and to use regmap directly in
> each component, and then when using regmap, do use the regmap raw
> functions instead of the bulkread/write?

Looking at the code, I would think it makes more sense use regmap_read
which enforces types since the tps65910 code only ever seems to use
regmap to access a single register at a time. Do you agree?

-rhyland
---
nvpublic



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-04-18 22:37    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site