From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752308Ab1HHJhS (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Aug 2011 05:37:18 -0400 Received: from opensource.wolfsonmicro.com ([80.75.67.52]:60528 "EHLO opensource2.wolfsonmicro.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751847Ab1HHJhN (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Aug 2011 05:37:13 -0400 Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2011 18:37:05 +0900 From: Mark Brown To: Danny Huang Cc: "lrg@ti.com" , "mike@compulab.co.il" , "sameo@linux.intel.com" , Xin Xie , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: tps6586x: add SMx slew rate setting Message-ID: <20110808093703.GC12376@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> References: <1312457662-4490-1-git-send-email-dahuang@nvidia.com> <20110804121237.GA9959@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <1BA5D2DFD2730747A2B3725B59933B93C07A47561C@HKMAIL01.nvidia.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1BA5D2DFD2730747A2B3725B59933B93C07A47561C@HKMAIL01.nvidia.com> X-Cookie: You will have long and healthy life. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 07:51:15PM +0800, Danny Huang wrote: > Thanks for the feedback. > The reason for using driver_data is that I can't find a proper field in regulator_init_data for the slew rate setting. > I'll do some correction based on the feedback and try to add a new field for the slew rate setting. No, this is OK - we should really rename the driver_data field, it's very misleading. However: > + return tps6586x_write(parent, reg, setting->slew_rate); what happens if the user sets zero for the slew rate (eg, if another field is added to the platform data that they want to set)? Is this a sane setting (like the chip default) or might it break something?