[RFT][PATCH 1/2] regulator: ab8500: Fix build error

[RFT][PATCH 1/2] regulator: ab8500: Fix build error

[Axel Lin]

This build error is introduced by commit 6a9fe8319
"regulator: ab8500: Added get_optimum_mode on regulators with idle mode".

  CC      drivers/regulator/ab8500.o
drivers/regulator/ab8500.c:500:23: error: 'ab8500_regulator_fixed_ops' undeclared here (not in a function)
drivers/regulator/ab8500.c:510:3: error: unknown field 'update_val_enable' specified in initializer
make[2]: *** [drivers/regulator/ab8500.o] Error 1
make[1]: *** [drivers/regulator] Error 2
make: *** [drivers] Error 2

Signed-off-by: Axel Lin <axel.lin@ingics.com>
---
 drivers/regulator/ab8500.c |   11 +++++------
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/regulator/ab8500.c b/drivers/regulator/ab8500.c
index d0ce436..ffabff7 100644
--- a/drivers/regulator/ab8500.c
+++ b/drivers/regulator/ab8500.c
@@ -494,10 +494,13 @@ static struct ab8500_regulator_info
 		.update_val_idle	= 0x82,
 		.update_val_normal	= 0x02,
 	},
+	/*
+	 * Regulators with fixed voltage and normal mode
+	 */
 	[AB8500_LDO_USB] = {
 		.desc = {
 			.name           = "LDO-USB",
-			.ops            = &ab8500_regulator_fixed_ops,
+			.ops            = &ab8500_regulator_ops,
 			.type           = REGULATOR_VOLTAGE,
 			.id             = AB8500_LDO_USB,
 			.owner          = THIS_MODULE,
@@ -507,12 +510,8 @@ static struct ab8500_regulator_info
 		.update_bank            = 0x03,
 		.update_reg             = 0x82,
 		.update_mask            = 0x03,
-		.update_val_enable      = 0x01,
+		.update_val             = 0x01,
 	},
-
-	/*
-	 * Regulators with fixed voltage and normal mode
-	 */
 	[AB8500_LDO_AUDIO] = {
 		.desc = {
 			.name		= "LDO-AUDIO",
-- 
1.7.9.5

[RFT][PATCH 2/2] regulator: ab8500: Use regulator_list_voltage_linear for fixed voltage

[Axel Lin]

Both ab8500_regulator_mode_ops and ab8500_regulator_ops do not have volt_table
setting, thus we can not use regulator_list_voltage_table for them.
However, they have min_uV setting with n_voltages = 1, so use
regulator_list_voltage_linear instead.

Signed-off-by: Axel Lin <axel.lin@ingics.com>
---
 drivers/regulator/ab8500.c |    4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/regulator/ab8500.c b/drivers/regulator/ab8500.c
index ffabff7..24d490e 100644
--- a/drivers/regulator/ab8500.c
+++ b/drivers/regulator/ab8500.c
@@ -363,7 +363,7 @@ static struct regulator_ops ab8500_regulator_mode_ops = {
 	.set_mode		= ab8500_regulator_set_mode,
 	.get_mode		= ab8500_regulator_get_mode,
 	.get_voltage_sel 	= ab8500_regulator_get_voltage_sel,
-	.list_voltage		= regulator_list_voltage_table,
+	.list_voltage		= regulator_list_voltage_linear,
 	.set_voltage_time_sel 	= ab8500_regulator_set_voltage_time_sel,
 };
 
@@ -372,7 +372,7 @@ static struct regulator_ops ab8500_regulator_ops = {
 	.disable		= ab8500_regulator_disable,
 	.is_enabled		= ab8500_regulator_is_enabled,
 	.get_voltage_sel 	= ab8500_regulator_get_voltage_sel,
-	.list_voltage		= regulator_list_voltage_table,
+	.list_voltage		= regulator_list_voltage_linear,
 };
 
 static struct ab8500_regulator_info
-- 
1.7.9.5

[RFT][PATCH] regulator: ab8500: Remove get_voltage_sel for fixed voltage

[Axel Lin]

Current code sets get_voltage_sel to ab8500_regulator_get_voltage_sel,
however both ab8500_regulator_mode_ops and ab8500_regulator_ops do not
have voltage_bank, voltage_reg and voltage_mask settings.
So it looks wrong to use ab8500_regulator_get_voltage_sel as
get_voltage_sel callback in these cases.

A simple fix is just not implement get_voltage_sel, regulator core will
report microvolts in sysfs even with only list_voltage().

Signed-off-by: Axel Lin <axel.lin@ingics.com>
---
Just found this needs to be fixed after I sent previous ab8500 patches,
this patch is on top of previous ab8500 fixes.

Axel
 drivers/regulator/ab8500.c |    2 --
 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/regulator/ab8500.c b/drivers/regulator/ab8500.c
index 24d490e..67b4412 100644
--- a/drivers/regulator/ab8500.c
+++ b/drivers/regulator/ab8500.c
@@ -362,7 +362,6 @@ static struct regulator_ops ab8500_regulator_mode_ops = {
 	.get_optimum_mode	= ab8500_regulator_get_optimum_mode,
 	.set_mode		= ab8500_regulator_set_mode,
 	.get_mode		= ab8500_regulator_get_mode,
-	.get_voltage_sel 	= ab8500_regulator_get_voltage_sel,
 	.list_voltage		= regulator_list_voltage_linear,
 	.set_voltage_time_sel 	= ab8500_regulator_set_voltage_time_sel,
 };
@@ -371,7 +370,6 @@ static struct regulator_ops ab8500_regulator_ops = {
 	.enable			= ab8500_regulator_enable,
 	.disable		= ab8500_regulator_disable,
 	.is_enabled		= ab8500_regulator_is_enabled,
-	.get_voltage_sel 	= ab8500_regulator_get_voltage_sel,
 	.list_voltage		= regulator_list_voltage_linear,
 };
 
-- 
1.7.9.5

Re: [RFT][PATCH 1/2] regulator: ab8500: Fix build error

[Lee Jones]

Hi Axel,

> This build error is introduced by commit 6a9fe8319
> "regulator: ab8500: Added get_optimum_mode on regulators with idle mode".
> 
>   CC      drivers/regulator/ab8500.o
> drivers/regulator/ab8500.c:500:23: error: 'ab8500_regulator_fixed_ops' undeclared here (not in a function)
> drivers/regulator/ab8500.c:510:3: error: unknown field 'update_val_enable' specified in initializer
> make[2]: *** [drivers/regulator/ab8500.o] Error 1
> make[1]: *** [drivers/regulator] Error 2
> make: *** [drivers] Error 2
> 
> Signed-off-by: Axel Lin <axel.lin@ingics.com>

The patches which caused the issues addressed by this patch-set have
since been rewritten. I have subsequently requested that Mark deletes
the AB8500 for-next branch. We're going to start again after this
merge window.

Thank you for your efforts though Axel, they are appreciated.

Kind regards,
Lee

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog

Re: [RFT][PATCH 1/2] regulator: ab8500: Fix build error

[Mark Brown]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 923 bytes --]

On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 10:24:21AM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:

> The patches which caused the issues addressed by this patch-set have
> since been rewritten. I have subsequently requested that Mark deletes
> the AB8500 for-next branch. We're going to start again after this
> merge window.

So, as discussed you really shouldn't have done that - unless there's a
very serious problem you should be assuming that patches that have been
applied are going to stay applied and working from the latest upstream
tree.  Once something is in -next the expectation is that it's going to
be sent during the next merge window.  As well as the issues with
maintainers getting fed up having to look at the same code over and over
again it causes people like Axel to waste their time.

However I am probably going to just throw away the current ab8500 work
this time.  Please resend your patches after the merge window (which
just opened).

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]