lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2024]   [Apr]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v8 1/3] input: pm8xxx-vibrator: refactor to support new SPMI vibrator
From


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

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2024-05-27 16:20    [W:0.032 / U:0.272 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site