lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Oct]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 5/5] regulator: map consumer regulator based on device tree

>
>> @@ -1178,6 +1225,10 @@ static struct regulator *_regulator_get(struct device *dev, const char *id,
>> goto found;
>> }
>> }
>> + if (!dev)
>> + list_for_each_entry(rdev,&regulator_list, list)
>> + if (strcmp(rdev_get_name(rdev), id))
>> + goto found;
>>
>
> This looks really strange, we didn't remove any old lookup code and the
> DT lookup jumps to found by iself so why are we adding code here?

The old lookup code looks up using the regulator_map_list, and the dt
lookup depends on a dev pointer to extract the of_node.
This above code was needed for cases when a regulator_get() would be
called on dt builds without specifying a device pointer, like the
cpufreq implementations you mentioned.
This is what I tried putting in the comments above the lookup code.

/*
* Lookup happens in 3 ways
* 1. If a dev and dev->of_node exist, look for a
* regulator mapping in dt node.
* 2. Check if a match can be found in regulator_map_list
* if regulator info is still passed in non-dt way
* 3. if !dev, then just look for a matching regulator name.
* Useful for dt builds using regulator_get() without specifying
* a device.
*/

I know its quite complicated but thats because we need to support both
the legacy and the dt based lookups.

>
>> + if (supply) {
>> + struct regulator_dev *r;
>> + struct device_node *node;
>> +
>> + /* first do a dt based lookup */
>> + if (dev) {
>> + node = of_get_regulator(dev, supply);
>> + if (node)
>> + list_for_each_entry(r,&regulator_list, list)
>> + if (node == r->dev.parent->of_node)
>> + goto found;
>> }
>>
>> - if (!found) {
>> - dev_err(dev, "Failed to find supply %s\n",
>> - init_data->supply_regulator);
>> - ret = -ENODEV;
>> - goto scrub;
>> - }
>> + /* next try doing it non-dt way */
>> + list_for_each_entry(r,&regulator_list, list)
>> + if (strcmp(rdev_get_name(r), supply) == 0)
>> + goto found;
>>
>> + dev_err(dev, "Failed to find supply %s\n", supply);
>> + ret = -ENODEV;
>> + goto scrub;
>> +
>> +found:
>
> This is all getting *really* complicated and illegible. I'm not sure
> what the best way to structure is but erroring out early looks useful.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-10-11 07:51    [W:0.112 / U:0.676 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site