From: Axel Lin <axel.lin@gmail.com>
To: "Zhang, Sonic" <Sonic.Zhang@analog.com>
Cc: Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>,
Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Liam Girdwood <lrg@ti.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2] regulator: ad5398: Fix min/max current limit boundary checking
Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2012 11:18:48 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1341371928.25411.2.camel@phoenix> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <DB904C5425BA6F4E8424B3B51A1414D1714080606C@NWD2CMBX1.ad.analog.com>
> >That is why we need to add:
> >if (min_uA < chip->min_uA)
> > min_uA = chip->min_uA;
> >
>
> Yes, but if you apply this logic to min_uA, you should apply the same logic to max_uA, even though it is not used in your application.
Actually, the logic is the same:
to find a supported (minmal) current in specified range.
The question is the equation used in current code does not allow
min_uA < chip->min_uA.
Setting min_uA = chip->min_uA if min_uA < chip->min_uA does make sense
because botch request actually returns the same current value.
( I mean no user visible change )
Adding below logic is not necessary.
( Note: Adding this or not does not have any user visible change, it's
just not necessary)
if (max_uA > chip->min_uA)
max_uA = chip->max_uA;
It is not necessary because the equation to choose selector does not
depends on max_uA. No matter if we set max_uA = chip->max_uA or not in
this case, it does not impact the equation to choose the selector.
But, well, if you really prefer adding it. I'll send a v3 for it.
Just let me know how do you think.
Regards,
Axel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-07-04 3:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-07-03 7:42 [PATCH v2] regulator: ad5398: Fix min/max current limit boundary checking Axel Lin
2012-07-03 7:54 ` Zhang, Sonic
2012-07-03 8:06 ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2012-07-03 8:13 ` Zhang, Sonic
2012-07-03 8:24 ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2012-07-03 8:33 ` Zhang, Sonic
2012-07-03 9:44 ` Axel Lin
2012-07-03 9:51 ` Zhang, Sonic
2012-07-03 11:36 ` Axel Lin
2012-07-04 2:56 ` Zhang, Sonic
2012-07-04 3:18 ` Axel Lin [this message]
2012-07-04 3:44 ` Zhang, Sonic
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1341371928.25411.2.camel@phoenix \
--to=axel.lin@gmail.com \
--cc=Sonic.Zhang@analog.com \
--cc=broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
--cc=lars@metafoo.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lrg@ti.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.