Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 07 Jul 2015 16:21:15 +0530 | From | Vaibhav Hiremath <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH-V5 3/4] mfd: 88pm800: Set default interrupt clear method |
| |
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(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/88pm800.c b/drivers/mfd/88pm800.c >>>> index d495737..66347be 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/mfd/88pm800.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/mfd/88pm800.c >>>> @@ -374,7 +374,7 @@ static int device_irq_init_800(struct pm80x_chip *chip) >>>> { >>>> struct regmap *map = chip->regmap; >>>> unsigned long flags = IRQF_ONESHOT; >>>> - int data, mask, ret = -EINVAL; >>>> + int irq_clr_mode, mask, ret = -EINVAL; >>>> >>>> if (!map || !chip->irq) { >>>> dev_err(chip->dev, "incorrect parameters\n"); >>>> @@ -382,15 +382,16 @@ static int device_irq_init_800(struct pm80x_chip *chip) >>>> } >>>> >>>> /* >>>> - * irq_mode defines the way of clearing interrupt. it's read-clear by >>>> - * default. >>>> + * irq_clr_on_wr defines the way of clearing interrupt by >>>> + * read/write(0/1). It's read-clear by default. >>>> */ >>>> mask = >>>> PM800_WAKEUP2_INV_INT | PM800_WAKEUP2_INT_CLEAR | >>>> PM800_WAKEUP2_INT_MASK; >>>> >>>> - data = PM800_WAKEUP2_INT_CLEAR; >>>> - ret = regmap_update_bits(map, PM800_WAKEUP2, mask, data); >>>> + irq_clr_mode = chip->irq_clr_method == PM800_IRQ_CLR_ON_WRITE ? >>>> + PM800_WAKEUP2_INT_WRITE_CLEAR : PM800_WAKEUP2_INT_READ_CLEAR; >>>> + ret = regmap_update_bits(map, PM800_WAKEUP2, mask, irq_clr_mode); >>> >>> What's stopping you just passing PM800_WAKEUP2_INT_WRITE_CLEAR or >>> PM800_WAKEUP2_INT_READ_CLEAR from pdata? Then you can use the value >>> directly without all of this faffing about. >>> >>> regmap_update_bits(map, PM800_WAKEUP2, mask, pdata->irq_clr_mode); >>> >> >> Because "irq_clr_method" is of boolean type. >> And macros which you are referring to is, >> >> #define PM800_WAKEUP2_INT_READ_CLEAR (0 << 1) >> #define PM800_WAKEUP2_INT_WRITE_CLEAR (1 << 1) >> >> >> And also, I feel it is more cleaner approach with the current code as >> register definition and userflag are maintained separately. > > I see your point, although it's a shame we have to have this code in > its place. > > One thing I think you can do though is rid chip->irq_clr_method, just > use the one you already have in pdata. >
Looking at the current code, Yes, this can be done, but I have to do some more changes around it, to make code cleaner,
change the signature of
static int device_irq_init_800(struct pm80x_chip *chip)
TO
static int device_irq_init_800(struct pm80x_chip *chip, struct pm80x_platform_data *pdata)
and then only use pdata->irq_clr_method.
How do you want to get this inside? V6 version? or separate patch?
I have one more cleanup patch in the queue, which I am planning to submit today, if you are ok then I can submit along with that.
Thanks, Vaibhav
| |