[PATCH 14/15] drivers/regulators: Enable the ab8500 for Device Tree

[lee.jones@linaro.org (Lee Jones)]

On 07/05/12 18:08, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, May 04, 2012 at 07:23:24PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
>
> Once again, please try to make sure your changelog matches the
> subsystem.  This also isn't consistent with the other regulator change
> further up the series :(
>
> You've also not included any binding documenation here, binding
> documentation should be included for new bindings.
>
>>
>> +static __devinit int
>> +ab8500_regulator_of_probe(struct platform_device *pdev, struct device_node *np)
>> +{
>> +	struct regulator_init_data *ab8500_regulator;
>> +	struct device_node *child;
>> +	int err, value, i, id = 0;
>> +
>> +	/* Initialise regulator registers to platform specific values. */
>> +	for (i = 0; i<  ARRAY_SIZE(ab8500_reg_init); i++) {
>> +		err = of_property_read_u32(np, ab8500_reg_init[i].of_name,&value);
>> +		if (err<  0)
>> +			return err;
>> +
>> +		err = ab8500_regulator_init_registers(pdev, i, value);
>> +		if (err<  0)
>> +			return err;
>
> You should be using of_regulator_match() for this (I think it's supposed
> to do an equivalent job...) rather than open coding.

of_regulator_match() didn't exist when I wrote this. In fact, it only 
made it into -next a couple of days ago. Besides, it doesn't satisfy the 
needs of this code segment. of_regulator_match() is a(nother) wrapper 
around of_get_regulation_constraints(), which is only used to populate 
'struct regulation_constraints constraints' after being provided with a 
selection of .compatible strings.

I'd be happy to use an API for what this is trying to achieve, however 
there aren't any as far as I know.

>> +	/* Register each ab8500 regulator found in the Device Tree. */
>> +	for_each_child_of_node(np, child) {
>> +		ab8500_regulator = of_get_regulator_init_data(&pdev->dev, child);
>
> Definitely don't do this - you should unconditionally register all the
> regulators that physically exist, this allows users to inspect their
> state even if they aren't used.

No problem. Thanks for the information. I'll change that and re-submit.

> It's possible the original driver has this bug (I didn't check but
>
>> +		if (strcmp(ab8500_regulator->constraints.name, "dummy"))
>> +			ab8500_regulator_register(pdev, ab8500_regulator, id, child);
>
> This is really broken - the whole purpose of allowing users to specify a
> name in the constraints is to allow them to assign a name that's
> meaningful for their board so they can tie the software in with the
> schematic which we will display in diagnostics.  Forcing them to specify
> magic strings as the supply name defeats this and makes diagnostics from
> the kernel more obscure.

Noted. I'll have that changed to. Thanks.

>>   	pdata = dev_get_platdata(ab8500->dev);
>> -	if (!pdata) {
>> -		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "null pdata\n");
>> +	if (!pdata&&  !np) {
>> +		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "null pdata and no device tree found\n");
>>   		return -EINVAL;
>>   	}
>
> Neither should be mandatory.

Okay.

Thanks for the review Mark. I'll get it fixed up and supply early next week.

Kind regards,
Lee

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead
M: +44 77 88 633 515
Linaro.org ? Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog