From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ingi Kim <ingi2.kim@samsung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] leds: rt5033: Add RT5033 Flash led device driver
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2015 11:31:44 +0900
Message-ID: <565BB510.2040903@samsung.com>
References: <1448446948-13729-1-git-send-email-ingi2.kim@samsung.com>
 <1448446948-13729-3-git-send-email-ingi2.kim@samsung.com>
 <5655D001.8090803@samsung.com> <5656BC88.2070603@samsung.com>
 <5656D43D.106@samsung.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-reply-to: <5656D43D.106@samsung.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Jacek Anaszewski <j.anaszewski@samsung.com>
Cc: robh+dt@kernel.org, pawel.moll@arm.com, mark.rutland@arm.com, ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk, galak@codeaurora.org, sameo@linux.intel.com, lee.jones@linaro.org, rpurdie@rpsys.net, inki.dae@samsung.com, sw0312.kim@samsung.com, beomho.seo@samsung.com, andi.shyti@samsung.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-leds@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org

Hi Jacek,

On 2015=EB=85=84 11=EC=9B=94 26=EC=9D=BC 18:43, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
> Hi Ingi,
>=20
> On 11/26/2015 09:02 AM, Ingi Kim wrote:
> [...]
>>>> +torch_unlock:
>>>> +    mutex_unlock(&led->lock);
>>>> +    return ret;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +static int rt5033_led_flash_brightness_set(struct led_classdev_fl=
ash *fled_cdev,
>>>> +                       u32 brightness)
>>>> +{
>>>> +    struct rt5033_sub_led *sub_led =3D flcdev_to_sub_led(fled_cde=
v);
>>>> +    struct rt5033_led *led =3D sub_led_to_led(sub_led);
>>>> +
>>>> +    mutex_lock(&led->lock);
>>>> +    sub_led->flash_brightness =3D brightness;
>>>> +    mutex_unlock(&led->lock);
>>>
>>> Mutex protection is redundant in this case. You would need it if de=
vice
>>> state was also changed here.
>>
>> Okay, I'll remove it.
>>
>>>
>>> BTW why flash brightness can't be written to the device here?
>>>
>>
>> Flash brightness is only affected when FLED flashed (strobing).
>> So, I think it is better to be written in rt5033_led_flash_strobe_se=
t function.
>=20
> strobe_set op should strobe the flash ASAP, and delegating brightness
> setting there extends a delay between calling strobe_set op
> and actual flash strobe. If you set the brightness here, then you
> wouldn't have to do that in the strobe_set op, of course unless the
> the brightness is altered through the API of the other LED, in two
> separate LEDs case.
>=20

The brightness may be able to change its brightness in two separate LED=
s case as you see.
So, I think it would be better to write brightness setting in strobe_op=
=2E
In consideration of delay, of course, the brightness is set just when i=
t would be changed.

>>>> +
>>>> +    return 0;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +static int rt5033_led_flash_timeout_set(struct led_classdev_flash=
 *fled_cdev,
>>>> +                    u32 timeout)
>>>> +{
>>>> +    struct rt5033_sub_led *sub_led =3D flcdev_to_sub_led(fled_cde=
v);
>>>> +    struct rt5033_led *led =3D sub_led_to_led(sub_led);
>>>> +
>>>> +    mutex_lock(&led->lock);
>>>> +    sub_led->flash_timeout =3D timeout;
>>>> +    mutex_unlock(&led->lock);
>>>
>>> Ditto.
>>>
>=20
> Timeout should be also written here.
>=20

The timeout may be able to change its flash timeout in two separate LED=
s case as you see.
So, I think it would be better to write timeout setting in strobe_op.
In consideration of delay, of course, the timeout is set just when it w=
ould be changed.

> If you will add regmap_write in both ops, then mutex protection will
> have to be preserved, to assure consistency between registers state
> and sub_led->flash_brightness and sub_led->flash_timeout state.
>=20

Thanks, but mutex protection is useless in this case.
so I try to remove it.

>>
>>>> +#define RT5033_FLED_CTRL4_VTRREG_MAX    0x60
>>>
>>> Rename DEF to MASK.
>=20
> Hmm, here it should be: Rename MAX to MASK.
>=20

Oh
Okay, Thanks :)