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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox