From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Krzysztof Kozlowski Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/7] max8903: cleans up confusing relationship between dc_valid, dok and dcm. Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2016 08:23:33 +0200 Message-ID: <57639765.3030101@samsung.com> References: <1464849897-21527-3-git-send-email-chris@lapa.com.au> <1466139626-51434-1-git-send-email-chris@lapa.com.au> <1466139626-51434-4-git-send-email-chris@lapa.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-reply-to: <1466139626-51434-4-git-send-email-chris@lapa.com.au> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Chris Lapa , dwmw2@infradead.org, dbaryshkov@gmail.com, sre@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com, robh+dt@kernel.org Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 06/17/2016 07:00 AM, Chris Lapa wrote: > From: Chris Lapa > > The max8903_charger.h file indicated that dcm and dok were not optional > when dc_valid is set. > > It makes sense to have dok as a compulsory pin when dc_valid is given. > However dcm can be optionally wired to a fixed level especially when the > circuit is configured for dc power exclusively. > > The previous implementation already allowed for this somewhat, however no > error was given if dok wasn't given whilst dc_valid was. > > The new implementation enforces dok presence when dc_valid is given. Whilst > allowing dcm to be optional. > > Signed-off-by: Chris Lapa > --- > drivers/power/max8903_charger.c | 23 ++++++++++------------- > include/linux/power/max8903_charger.h | 6 +++--- > 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) Code looks correct: Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski Best regards, Krzysztof