Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 3 Apr 2024 13:29:46 +0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v8 1/3] input: pm8xxx-vibrator: refactor to support new SPMI vibrator | From | Fenglin Wu <> |
| |
On 4/2/2024 11:21 PM, Konrad Dybcio wrote: > On 1.04.2024 10:38 AM, Fenglin Wu via B4 Relay wrote: >> From: Fenglin Wu <quic_fenglinw@quicinc.com> >> >> Currently, vibrator control register addresses are hard coded, >> including the base address and offsets, it's not flexible to >> support new SPMI vibrator module which is usually included in >> different PMICs with different base address. Refactor it by using >> the base address defined in devicetree. >> >> Signed-off-by: Fenglin Wu <quic_fenglinw@quicinc.com> >> --- > > [...] > >> if (regs->enable_mask) >> - rc = regmap_update_bits(vib->regmap, regs->enable_addr, >> + rc = regmap_update_bits(vib->regmap, vib->enable_addr, >> regs->enable_mask, on ? ~0 : 0); > > The idiomatic way across the kernel seems to be writing the mask value > instead of ~0 (which also saves like 2 cpu instructions) > > > Not sure about how ssbi addressing works, but except for that lgtm > Agree. SSBI driver doesn't provide reg_update_bits function call so similar mathematics is done on the value before writing to the register, I can update it to use enable_mask directly in next version.
> Konrad
| |