Re: [PATCH v7 08/10] regulator: tps6594-regulator: Add TI TPS65224 PMIC regulators

From: Dan Carpenter
Date: Thu Apr 25 2024 - 04:00:06 EST

Next message: Norihiko Hama: "RE: [PATCH v4] usb-storage: Optimize scan delay more precisely"
Previous message: syzbot: "[syzbot] [f2fs?] KASAN: slab-out-of-bounds Read in f2fs_get_node_info"
Next in thread: Bhargav Raviprakash: "Re: [PATCH v7 08/10] regulator: tps6594-regulator: Add TI TPS65224 PMIC regulators"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 11:49:59AM +0000, Bhargav Raviprakash wrote:
> From: Nirmala Devi Mal Nadar <m.nirmaladevi@xxxxxxxx>
>
> Add support for TPS65224 regulators (bucks and LDOs) to TPS6594 driver as
> they have significant functional overlap. TPS65224 PMIC has 4 buck
> regulators and 3 LDOs. BUCK12 can operate in dual phase.
> The output voltages are configurable and are meant to supply power to the
> main processor and other components.
>
> Signed-off-by: Nirmala Devi Mal Nadar <m.nirmaladevi@xxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Bhargav Raviprakash <bhargav.r@xxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/regulator/Kconfig | 4 +-
> drivers/regulator/tps6594-regulator.c | 243 +++++++++++++++++++++++---
> 2 files changed, 222 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/regulator/Kconfig b/drivers/regulator/Kconfig
> index 7db0a29b5..1e4119f00 100644
> --- a/drivers/regulator/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/regulator/Kconfig
> @@ -1563,13 +1563,15 @@ config REGULATOR_TPS6594
> depends on MFD_TPS6594 && OF
> default MFD_TPS6594
> help
> - This driver supports TPS6594 voltage regulator chips.
> + This driver supports TPS6594 series and TPS65224 voltage regulator chips.
> TPS6594 series of PMICs have 5 BUCKs and 4 LDOs
> voltage regulators.
> BUCKs 1,2,3,4 can be used in single phase or multiphase mode.
> Part number defines which single or multiphase mode is i used.
> It supports software based voltage control
> for different voltage domains.
> + TPS65224 PMIC has 4 BUCKs and 3 LDOs. BUCK12 can be used in dual phase.
> + All BUCKs and LDOs volatge can be controlled through software.
>
> config REGULATOR_TPS6524X
> tristate "TI TPS6524X Power regulators"
> diff --git a/drivers/regulator/tps6594-regulator.c b/drivers/regulator/tps6594-regulator.c
> index b7f0c8779..3c8e0b1cd 100644
> --- a/drivers/regulator/tps6594-regulator.c
> +++ b/drivers/regulator/tps6594-regulator.c
> @@ -66,6 +66,15 @@ static struct tps6594_regulator_irq_type tps6594_ext_regulator_irq_types[] = {
> REGULATOR_EVENT_OVER_VOLTAGE_WARN },
> };
>
> +static struct tps6594_regulator_irq_type tps65224_ext_regulator_irq_types[] = {
> + { TPS65224_IRQ_NAME_VCCA_UVOV, "VCCA", "voltage out of range",
> + REGULATOR_EVENT_REGULATION_OUT },
> + { TPS65224_IRQ_NAME_VMON1_UVOV, "VMON1", "voltage out of range",
> + REGULATOR_EVENT_REGULATION_OUT },
> + { TPS65224_IRQ_NAME_VMON2_UVOV, "VMON2", "voltage out of range",
> + REGULATOR_EVENT_REGULATION_OUT },
> +};
> +
> struct tps6594_regulator_irq_data {
> struct device *dev;
> struct tps6594_regulator_irq_type *type;
> @@ -122,6 +131,27 @@ static const struct linear_range ldos_4_ranges[] = {
> REGULATOR_LINEAR_RANGE(1200000, 0x20, 0x74, 25000),
> };
>
> +/* Voltage range for TPS65224 Bucks and LDOs */
> +static const struct linear_range tps65224_bucks_1_ranges[] = {
> + REGULATOR_LINEAR_RANGE(500000, 0x0a, 0x0e, 20000),
> + REGULATOR_LINEAR_RANGE(600000, 0x0f, 0x72, 5000),
> + REGULATOR_LINEAR_RANGE(1100000, 0x73, 0xaa, 10000),
> + REGULATOR_LINEAR_RANGE(1660000, 0xab, 0xfd, 20000),
> +};
> +
> +static const struct linear_range tps65224_bucks_2_3_4_ranges[] = {
> + REGULATOR_LINEAR_RANGE(500000, 0x0, 0x1a, 25000),
> + REGULATOR_LINEAR_RANGE(1200000, 0x1b, 0x45, 50000),
> +};
> +
> +static const struct linear_range tps65224_ldos_1_ranges[] = {
> + REGULATOR_LINEAR_RANGE(1200000, 0xC, 0x36, 50000),
> +};
> +
> +static const struct linear_range tps65224_ldos_2_3_ranges[] = {
> + REGULATOR_LINEAR_RANGE(600000, 0x0, 0x38, 50000),
> +};
> +
> /* Operations permitted on BUCK1/2/3/4/5 */
> static const struct regulator_ops tps6594_bucks_ops = {
> .is_enabled = regulator_is_enabled_regmap,
> @@ -197,6 +227,38 @@ static const struct regulator_desc buck_regs[] = {
> 4, 0, 0, NULL, 0, 0),
> };
>
> +/* Buck configuration for TPS65224 */
> +static const struct regulator_desc tps65224_buck_regs[] = {
> + TPS6594_REGULATOR("BUCK1", "buck1", TPS6594_BUCK_1,
> + REGULATOR_VOLTAGE, tps6594_bucks_ops, TPS65224_MASK_BUCK1_VSET,
> + TPS6594_REG_BUCKX_VOUT_1(0),
> + TPS65224_MASK_BUCK1_VSET,
> + TPS6594_REG_BUCKX_CTRL(0),
> + TPS6594_BIT_BUCK_EN, 0, 0, tps65224_bucks_1_ranges,
> + 4, 0, 0, NULL, 0, 0),
> + TPS6594_REGULATOR("BUCK2", "buck2", TPS6594_BUCK_2,
> + REGULATOR_VOLTAGE, tps6594_bucks_ops, TPS65224_MASK_BUCKS_VSET,
> + TPS6594_REG_BUCKX_VOUT_1(1),
> + TPS65224_MASK_BUCKS_VSET,
> + TPS6594_REG_BUCKX_CTRL(1),
> + TPS6594_BIT_BUCK_EN, 0, 0, tps65224_bucks_2_3_4_ranges,
> + 4, 0, 0, NULL, 0, 0),
> + TPS6594_REGULATOR("BUCK3", "buck3", TPS6594_BUCK_3,
> + REGULATOR_VOLTAGE, tps6594_bucks_ops, TPS65224_MASK_BUCKS_VSET,
> + TPS6594_REG_BUCKX_VOUT_1(2),
> + TPS65224_MASK_BUCKS_VSET,
> + TPS6594_REG_BUCKX_CTRL(2),
> + TPS6594_BIT_BUCK_EN, 0, 0, tps65224_bucks_2_3_4_ranges,
> + 4, 0, 0, NULL, 0, 0),
> + TPS6594_REGULATOR("BUCK4", "buck4", TPS6594_BUCK_4,
> + REGULATOR_VOLTAGE, tps6594_bucks_ops, TPS65224_MASK_BUCKS_VSET,
> + TPS6594_REG_BUCKX_VOUT_1(3),
> + TPS65224_MASK_BUCKS_VSET,
> + TPS6594_REG_BUCKX_CTRL(3),
> + TPS6594_BIT_BUCK_EN, 0, 0, tps65224_bucks_2_3_4_ranges,
> + 4, 0, 0, NULL, 0, 0),
> +};
> +
> static struct tps6594_regulator_irq_type tps6594_buck1_irq_types[] = {
> { TPS6594_IRQ_NAME_BUCK1_OV, "BUCK1", "overvoltage", REGULATOR_EVENT_OVER_VOLTAGE_WARN },
> { TPS6594_IRQ_NAME_BUCK1_UV, "BUCK1", "undervoltage", REGULATOR_EVENT_UNDER_VOLTAGE },
> @@ -269,6 +331,41 @@ static struct tps6594_regulator_irq_type tps6594_ldo4_irq_types[] = {
> REGULATOR_EVENT_OVER_CURRENT },
> };
>
> +static struct tps6594_regulator_irq_type tps65224_buck1_irq_types[] = {
> + { TPS65224_IRQ_NAME_BUCK1_UVOV, "BUCK1", "voltage out of range",
> + REGULATOR_EVENT_REGULATION_OUT },
> +};
> +
> +static struct tps6594_regulator_irq_type tps65224_buck2_irq_types[] = {
> + { TPS65224_IRQ_NAME_BUCK2_UVOV, "BUCK2", "voltage out of range",
> + REGULATOR_EVENT_REGULATION_OUT },
> +};
> +
> +static struct tps6594_regulator_irq_type tps65224_buck3_irq_types[] = {
> + { TPS65224_IRQ_NAME_BUCK3_UVOV, "BUCK3", "voltage out of range",
> + REGULATOR_EVENT_REGULATION_OUT },
> +};
> +
> +static struct tps6594_regulator_irq_type tps65224_buck4_irq_types[] = {
> + { TPS65224_IRQ_NAME_BUCK4_UVOV, "BUCK4", "voltage out of range",
> + REGULATOR_EVENT_REGULATION_OUT },
> +};
> +
> +static struct tps6594_regulator_irq_type tps65224_ldo1_irq_types[] = {
> + { TPS65224_IRQ_NAME_LDO1_UVOV, "LDO1", "voltage out of range",
> + REGULATOR_EVENT_REGULATION_OUT },
> +};
> +
> +static struct tps6594_regulator_irq_type tps65224_ldo2_irq_types[] = {
> + { TPS65224_IRQ_NAME_LDO2_UVOV, "LDO2", "voltage out of range",
> + REGULATOR_EVENT_REGULATION_OUT },
> +};
> +
> +static struct tps6594_regulator_irq_type tps65224_ldo3_irq_types[] = {
> + { TPS65224_IRQ_NAME_LDO3_UVOV, "LDO3", "voltage out of range",
> + REGULATOR_EVENT_REGULATION_OUT },
> +};
> +
> static struct tps6594_regulator_irq_type *tps6594_bucks_irq_types[] = {
> tps6594_buck1_irq_types,
> tps6594_buck2_irq_types,
> @@ -284,7 +381,20 @@ static struct tps6594_regulator_irq_type *tps6594_ldos_irq_types[] = {
> tps6594_ldo4_irq_types,
> };
>
> -static const struct regulator_desc multi_regs[] = {
> +static struct tps6594_regulator_irq_type *tps65224_bucks_irq_types[] = {
> + tps65224_buck1_irq_types,
> + tps65224_buck2_irq_types,
> + tps65224_buck3_irq_types,
> + tps65224_buck4_irq_types,
> +};
> +
> +static struct tps6594_regulator_irq_type *tps65224_ldos_irq_types[] = {
> + tps65224_ldo1_irq_types,
> + tps65224_ldo2_irq_types,
> + tps65224_ldo3_irq_types,
> +};
> +
> +static const struct regulator_desc tps6594_multi_regs[] = {
> TPS6594_REGULATOR("BUCK12", "buck12", TPS6594_BUCK_1,
> REGULATOR_VOLTAGE, tps6594_bucks_ops, TPS6594_MASK_BUCKS_VSET,
> TPS6594_REG_BUCKX_VOUT_1(1),
> @@ -315,7 +425,17 @@ static const struct regulator_desc multi_regs[] = {
> 4, 4000, 0, NULL, 0, 0),
> };
>
> -static const struct regulator_desc ldo_regs[] = {
> +static const struct regulator_desc tps65224_multi_regs[] = {
> + TPS6594_REGULATOR("BUCK12", "buck12", TPS6594_BUCK_1,
> + REGULATOR_VOLTAGE, tps6594_bucks_ops, TPS65224_MASK_BUCK1_VSET,
> + TPS6594_REG_BUCKX_VOUT_1(0),
> + TPS65224_MASK_BUCK1_VSET,
> + TPS6594_REG_BUCKX_CTRL(0),
> + TPS6594_BIT_BUCK_EN, 0, 0, tps65224_bucks_1_ranges,
> + 4, 4000, 0, NULL, 0, 0),
> +};
> +
> +static const struct regulator_desc tps6594_ldo_regs[] = {
> TPS6594_REGULATOR("LDO1", "ldo1", TPS6594_LDO_1,
> REGULATOR_VOLTAGE, tps6594_ldos_1_2_3_ops, TPS6594_MASK_LDO123_VSET,
> TPS6594_REG_LDOX_VOUT(0),
> @@ -346,6 +466,30 @@ static const struct regulator_desc ldo_regs[] = {
> 1, 0, 0, NULL, 0, 0),
> };
>
> +static const struct regulator_desc tps65224_ldo_regs[] = {
> + TPS6594_REGULATOR("LDO1", "ldo1", TPS6594_LDO_1,
> + REGULATOR_VOLTAGE, tps6594_ldos_1_2_3_ops, TPS6594_MASK_LDO123_VSET,
> + TPS6594_REG_LDOX_VOUT(0),
> + TPS6594_MASK_LDO123_VSET,
> + TPS6594_REG_LDOX_CTRL(0),
> + TPS6594_BIT_LDO_EN, 0, 0, tps65224_ldos_1_ranges,
> + 1, 0, 0, NULL, 0, TPS6594_BIT_LDO_BYPASS),
> + TPS6594_REGULATOR("LDO2", "ldo2", TPS6594_LDO_2,
> + REGULATOR_VOLTAGE, tps6594_ldos_1_2_3_ops, TPS6594_MASK_LDO123_VSET,
> + TPS6594_REG_LDOX_VOUT(1),
> + TPS6594_MASK_LDO123_VSET,
> + TPS6594_REG_LDOX_CTRL(1),
> + TPS6594_BIT_LDO_EN, 0, 0, tps65224_ldos_2_3_ranges,
> + 1, 0, 0, NULL, 0, TPS6594_BIT_LDO_BYPASS),
> + TPS6594_REGULATOR("LDO3", "ldo3", TPS6594_LDO_3,
> + REGULATOR_VOLTAGE, tps6594_ldos_1_2_3_ops, TPS6594_MASK_LDO123_VSET,
> + TPS6594_REG_LDOX_VOUT(2),
> + TPS6594_MASK_LDO123_VSET,
> + TPS6594_REG_LDOX_CTRL(2),
> + TPS6594_BIT_LDO_EN, 0, 0, tps65224_ldos_2_3_ranges,
> + 1, 0, 0, NULL, 0, TPS6594_BIT_LDO_BYPASS),
> +};
> +
> static irqreturn_t tps6594_regulator_irq_handler(int irq, void *data)
> {
> struct tps6594_regulator_irq_data *irq_data = data;
> @@ -369,17 +513,18 @@ static irqreturn_t tps6594_regulator_irq_handler(int irq, void *data)
> static int tps6594_request_reg_irqs(struct platform_device *pdev,
> struct regulator_dev *rdev,
> struct tps6594_regulator_irq_data *irq_data,
> - struct tps6594_regulator_irq_type *tps6594_regs_irq_types,
> + struct tps6594_regulator_irq_type *regs_irq_types,
> + size_t interrupt_cnt,
> int *irq_idx)
> {
> struct tps6594_regulator_irq_type *irq_type;
> struct tps6594 *tps = dev_get_drvdata(pdev->dev.parent);
> - int j;
> + size_t j;
> int irq;
> int error;
>
> - for (j = 0; j < REGS_INT_NB; j++) {
> - irq_type = &tps6594_regs_irq_types[j];
> + for (j = 0; j < interrupt_cnt; j++) {
> + irq_type = &regs_irq_types[j];
> irq = platform_get_irq_byname(pdev, irq_type->irq_name);
> if (irq < 0)
> return -EINVAL;
> @@ -412,14 +557,38 @@ static int tps6594_regulator_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> struct tps6594_ext_regulator_irq_data *irq_ext_reg_data;
> struct tps6594_regulator_irq_type *irq_type;
> u8 buck_configured[BUCK_NB] = { 0 };
> + u8 ldo_configured[LDO_NB] = { 0 };

This should be bool and the related changes like using true/false.

Actually, on reviewing this code even more, I really suggest you first
do some clean up to this driver and then just change this to:

int nr_ldo;

Then use that instead of LDO_NB.

buck_configured[] should be bool as well.

> u8 buck_multi[MULTI_PHASE_NB] = { 0 };
> - static const char * const multiphases[] = {"buck12", "buck123", "buck1234", "buck34"};
> + static const char * const tps6594_multiphases[] = {"buck12", "buck123",
> + "buck1234", "buck34"};
> + static const char * const tps65224_multiphases[] = {"buck12"};

The tps65224_multiphases[] array is never used except to get the
ARRAY_SIZE(). Neither of these are necessary. Just use
multi_regs[multi].supply_name instead.

> static const char *npname;
> int error, i, irq, multi, delta;
> int irq_idx = 0;
> int buck_idx = 0;
> + unsigned int multi_phase_cnt = 0;

No need to initialize this here.

> size_t ext_reg_irq_nb = 2;
> size_t reg_irq_nb;
> + struct tps6594_regulator_irq_type **bucks_irq_types;
> + const struct regulator_desc *multi_regs;
> + struct tps6594_regulator_irq_type **ldos_irq_types;
> + const struct regulator_desc *ldo_regs;
> + size_t interrupt_count;
> +
> + if (tps->chip_id == TPS65224) {
> + bucks_irq_types = tps65224_bucks_irq_types;
> + interrupt_count = ARRAY_SIZE(tps65224_buck1_irq_types);
> + multi_regs = tps65224_multi_regs;
> + ldos_irq_types = tps65224_ldos_irq_types;
> + ldo_regs = tps65224_ldo_regs;
> + } else {
> + bucks_irq_types = tps6594_bucks_irq_types;
> + interrupt_count = ARRAY_SIZE(tps6594_buck1_irq_types);
> + multi_regs = tps6594_multi_regs;
> + ldos_irq_types = tps6594_ldos_irq_types;
> + ldo_regs = tps6594_ldo_regs;

Initialize multi_phase_cnt in this block with all the other variables
instead of below.

> + }
> +
> enum {
> MULTI_BUCK12,
> MULTI_BUCK123,
> @@ -434,6 +603,10 @@ static int tps6594_regulator_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> config.driver_data = tps;
> config.regmap = tps->regmap;
>
> + multi_phase_cnt = (tps->chip_id == TPS65224) ?
> + ARRAY_SIZE(tps65224_multiphases) :
> + ARRAY_SIZE(tps6594_multiphases);
> +
> /*
> * Switch case defines different possible multi phase config
> * This is based on dts buck node name.
> @@ -442,13 +615,13 @@ static int tps6594_regulator_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> * In case of Multiphase configuration, value should be defined for
> * buck_configured to avoid creating bucks for every buck in multiphase
> */
> - for (multi = MULTI_FIRST; multi < MULTI_NUM; multi++) {
> - np = of_find_node_by_name(tps->dev->of_node, multiphases[multi]);
> + for (multi = MULTI_FIRST; multi < multi_phase_cnt; multi++) {
> + np = of_find_node_by_name(tps->dev->of_node, tps6594_multiphases[multi]);

Use multi_regs[multi].supply_name here.

> npname = of_node_full_name(np);
> np_pmic_parent = of_get_parent(of_get_parent(np));
> if (of_node_cmp(of_node_full_name(np_pmic_parent), tps->dev->of_node->full_name))
> continue;
> - delta = strcmp(npname, multiphases[multi]);
> + delta = strcmp(npname, tps6594_multiphases[multi]);
> if (!delta) {

Unrelated to your patch but this should be:

if (strcmp(npname, tps6594_multiphases[multi]) == 0) {

The == means that the strings are equal. No need for a delta variable.

> switch (multi) {
> case MULTI_BUCK12:
> @@ -486,6 +659,11 @@ static int tps6594_regulator_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> /* There is only 4 buck on LP8764 */
> buck_configured[4] = 1;
> reg_irq_nb = size_mul(REGS_INT_NB, (BUCK_NB - 1));
> + } else if (tps->chip_id == TPS65224) {
> + /* TPS65224 has 4 bucks and 3 LDOs. 1 Interrupt for each buck and ldo */
> + buck_configured[4] = 1;
> + ldo_configured[3] = 1;
> + reg_irq_nb = size_mul(1, (size_add((BUCK_NB - 1), (LDO_NB - 1))));
> } else {
> reg_irq_nb = size_mul(REGS_INT_NB, (size_add(BUCK_NB, LDO_NB)));

No need for size_add/mul(). These are small constants so it's not
going to integer overflow.

The other suggestion here would be to do a clean up of the driver first
so instead of marking the last buck_configured[4] = 1; we would instead
say "nr_buck = 4;" Then the math become easier and we can remove the
comments and the confusing subtractions.

if (tps->chip_id == LP8764) {
nr_buck = 4;
nr_ldo = 0;
} else if (tps->chip_id == TPS65224) {
nr_buck = ARRAY_SIZE(tps65224_buck_regs);
nr_ldo = ARRAY_SIZE(tps65224_ldo_regs);
} else {
nr_buck = BUCK_NB; // FIXME. ARRAY_SIZE()
nr_ldo = ARRAY_SIZE(tps6594_ldo_regs);
}

reg_irq_nb = multi_regs * (nr_buck + nr_ldo);

> }
> @@ -495,7 +673,7 @@ static int tps6594_regulator_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> if (!irq_data)
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> - for (i = 0; i < MULTI_PHASE_NB; i++) {
> + for (i = 0; i < multi_phase_cnt; i++) {
> if (buck_multi[i] == 0)
> continue;
>
> @@ -508,18 +686,23 @@ static int tps6594_regulator_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> /* config multiphase buck12+buck34 */
> if (i == 1)
> buck_idx = 2;
> +
> error = tps6594_request_reg_irqs(pdev, rdev, irq_data,
> - tps6594_bucks_irq_types[buck_idx], &irq_idx);
> + bucks_irq_types[buck_idx],
> + interrupt_count, &irq_idx);
> if (error)
> return error;
> +
> error = tps6594_request_reg_irqs(pdev, rdev, irq_data,
> - tps6594_bucks_irq_types[buck_idx + 1], &irq_idx);
> + bucks_irq_types[buck_idx + 1],
> + interrupt_count, &irq_idx);
> if (error)
> return error;
>
> if (i == 2 || i == 3) {
> error = tps6594_request_reg_irqs(pdev, rdev, irq_data,
> tps6594_bucks_irq_types[buck_idx + 2],
> + interrupt_count,
> &irq_idx);
> if (error)
> return error;
> @@ -527,6 +710,7 @@ static int tps6594_regulator_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> if (i == 3) {
> error = tps6594_request_reg_irqs(pdev, rdev, irq_data,
> tps6594_bucks_irq_types[buck_idx + 3],
> + interrupt_count,
> &irq_idx);
> if (error)
> return error;
> @@ -537,21 +721,26 @@ static int tps6594_regulator_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> if (buck_configured[i] == 1)
> continue;
>
> - rdev = devm_regulator_register(&pdev->dev, &buck_regs[i], &config);
> + const struct regulator_desc *buck_cfg = (tps->chip_id == TPS65224) ?
> + tps65224_buck_regs : buck_regs;
> +
> + rdev = devm_regulator_register(&pdev->dev, &buck_cfg[i], &config);
> if (IS_ERR(rdev))
> return dev_err_probe(tps->dev, PTR_ERR(rdev),
> - "failed to register %s regulator\n",
> - pdev->name);
> + "failed to register %s regulator\n", pdev->name);

There are too many unrelated white space changes in this patch.

>
> error = tps6594_request_reg_irqs(pdev, rdev, irq_data,
> - tps6594_bucks_irq_types[i], &irq_idx);
> + bucks_irq_types[i], interrupt_count, &irq_idx);
> if (error)
> return error;
> }
>
> - /* LP8764 dosen't have LDO */
> + /* LP8764 doesn't have LDO */
> if (tps->chip_id != LP8764) {
> - for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(ldo_regs); i++) {
> + for (i = 0; i < LDO_NB; i++) {
> + if (ldo_configured[i] == 1)
> + continue;
> +

Now that we have introduced a nr_ldo variable we can delete the
/* LP8764 doesn't have LDO */ comment and the if LP8764 statement and
the if (ldo_configured[i] == 1) condition.

for (i = 0; i < nr_ldo; i++) {
rdev = devm_regulator_register(&pdev->dev, &ldo_regs[i], &config);

The BUCK loop would only loop nr_buck times as well.

> rdev = devm_regulator_register(&pdev->dev, &ldo_regs[i], &config);
> if (IS_ERR(rdev))
> return dev_err_probe(tps->dev, PTR_ERR(rdev),
> @@ -559,7 +748,7 @@ static int tps6594_regulator_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> pdev->name);
>
> error = tps6594_request_reg_irqs(pdev, rdev, irq_data,
> - tps6594_ldos_irq_types[i],
> + ldos_irq_types[i], interrupt_count,
> &irq_idx);
> if (error)
> return error;
> @@ -568,16 +757,21 @@ static int tps6594_regulator_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>
> if (tps->chip_id == LP8764)
> ext_reg_irq_nb = ARRAY_SIZE(tps6594_ext_regulator_irq_types);
> + else if (tps->chip_id == TPS65224)
> + ext_reg_irq_nb = ARRAY_SIZE(tps65224_ext_regulator_irq_types);

Declare an irq_types pointer.

if (tps->chip_id == TPS65224) {
irq_types = tps65224_ext_regulator_irq_types;
irq_count = ARRAY_SIZE(tps65224_ext_regulator_irq_types);
} else {
irq_types = tps6594_ext_regulator_irq_types;
if (tps->chip_id == LP8764)
irq_count = ARRAY_SIZE(tps6594_ext_regulator_irq_types);
else
irq_count = 2;
}

>
> irq_ext_reg_data = devm_kmalloc_array(tps->dev,
> - ext_reg_irq_nb,
> - sizeof(struct tps6594_ext_regulator_irq_data),
> - GFP_KERNEL);
> + ext_reg_irq_nb,
> + sizeof(struct tps6594_ext_regulator_irq_data),
> + GFP_KERNEL);

Unrelated.

> if (!irq_ext_reg_data)
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> for (i = 0; i < ext_reg_irq_nb; ++i) {
> - irq_type = &tps6594_ext_regulator_irq_types[i];
> + if (tps->chip_id == TPS65224)
> + irq_type = &tps65224_ext_regulator_irq_types[i];
> + else
> + irq_type = &tps6594_ext_regulator_irq_types[i];
>
> irq = platform_get_irq_byname(pdev, irq_type->irq_name);
> if (irq < 0)

regards,
dan carpenter

Next message: Norihiko Hama: "RE: [PATCH v4] usb-storage: Optimize scan delay more precisely"
Previous message: syzbot: "[syzbot] [f2fs?] KASAN: slab-out-of-bounds Read in f2fs_get_node_info"
Next in thread: Bhargav Raviprakash: "Re: [PATCH v7 08/10] regulator: tps6594-regulator: Add TI TPS65224 PMIC regulators"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]