Re: [PATCH v1 6/7] regulator: tps65215: Define probe() helper functions

[Roger Quadros <rogerq@kernel.org>]

On 26/12/2024 23:54, Shree Ramamoorthy wrote:
> Factor register_regulators() and request_irqs() out into smaller functions.
> These 2 helper functions are used in the next restructure probe() patch to
> go through the common (overlapping) regulators and irqs first, then the
> device-specific structs identifed in the chip_data struct.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Shree Ramamoorthy <s-ramamoorthy@ti.com>
> ---
>  drivers/regulator/tps65219-regulator.c | 64 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 64 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/regulator/tps65219-regulator.c b/drivers/regulator/tps65219-regulator.c
> index 13f0e68d8e85..8469ee89802c 100644
> --- a/drivers/regulator/tps65219-regulator.c
> +++ b/drivers/regulator/tps65219-regulator.c
> @@ -346,6 +346,70 @@ static struct chip_data chip_info_table[] = {
>  	},
>  };
>  
> +static int tps65219_register_regulators(const struct regulator_desc *regulators,
> +					struct tps65219 *tps,
> +					struct device *dev,
> +					struct regulator_config config,
> +					unsigned int arr_size)
> +{
> +	int i;
> +	struct regulator_dev *rdev;

reverse xmas tree?

> +
> +	config.driver_data = tps;
> +	config.dev = tps->dev;
> +	config.regmap = tps->regmap;
> +
> +	for (i = 0; i < arr_size; i++) {
> +		rdev = devm_regulator_register(dev, &regulators[i],
> +						&config);
> +		if (IS_ERR(rdev)) {
> +			dev_err(tps->dev,
> +				"Failed to register %s regulator\n",
> +				regulators[i].name);
> +
> +			return PTR_ERR(rdev);
> +		}
> +	}
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int tps65219_request_irqs(struct tps65219_regulator_irq_type *irq_types,
> +				 struct tps65219 *tps, struct platform_device *pdev,
> +				 struct tps65219_regulator_irq_data *irq_data,
> +				 unsigned int arr_size)
> +{
> +	int i;
> +	int irq;
> +	int error;
> +	struct tps65219_regulator_irq_type *irq_type;

here too.

> +
> +	for (i = 0; i < arr_size; ++i) {
> +		irq_type = &irq_types[i];
> +

unnecessary new line.

> +		irq = platform_get_irq_byname(pdev, irq_type->irq_name);
> +		if (irq < 0)
> +			return -EINVAL;
> +
> +		irq_data[i].dev = tps->dev;
> +		irq_data[i].type = irq_type;
> +

here too

> +		error = devm_request_threaded_irq(tps->dev, irq, NULL,
> +						  tps65219_regulator_irq_handler,
> +						  IRQF_ONESHOT,
> +						  irq_type->irq_name,
> +						  &irq_data[i]);
> +		if (error) {
> +			dev_err(tps->dev,
> +				"Failed to request %s IRQ %d: %d\n",
> +				irq_type->irq_name, irq, error);
> +			return error;
> +		}
> +	}
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
>  static int tps65219_regulator_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  {
>  	struct tps65219 *tps = dev_get_drvdata(pdev->dev.parent);

This patch by itself will complain during build as there are no users for
these functions.
Could you please squash patches 6 and 7?

-- 
cheers,
-roger