Re: [PATCH v3 3/7] max8903: cleans up confusing relationship between dc_valid, dok and dcm.

[Chris Lapa]

On 17/06/2016 4:26 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 06/17/2016 07:00 AM, Chris Lapa wrote:
> > From: Chris Lapa <chris@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > 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 <chris@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  drivers/power/max8903_charger.c       | 23 ++++++++++-------------
> >  include/linux/power/max8903_charger.h |  6 +++---
> >  2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/power/max8903_charger.c b/drivers/power/max8903_charger.c
> > index 0a5b0e1..dbd911c4 100644
> > --- a/drivers/power/max8903_charger.c
> > +++ b/drivers/power/max8903_charger.c
> > @@ -211,27 +211,24 @@ static int max8903_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >  	}
> >
> >  	if (pdata->dc_valid) {
> > -		if (pdata->dok && gpio_is_valid(pdata->dok) &&
> > -				pdata->dcm && gpio_is_valid(pdata->dcm)) {
> > +		if (pdata->dok && gpio_is_valid(pdata->dok)) {
> >  			gpio = pdata->dok; /* PULL_UPed Interrupt */
> >  			ta_in = gpio_get_value(gpio) ? 0 : 1;
> > +		} else {
> > +			dev_err(dev, "When DC is wired, DOK should"
> > +					" be wired as well.\n");
>
> Just found one nit. Don't split the strings.
>         dev_err(dev,
>                 "When DC is wired, DOK should be wired as well.\n");
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof

Fixed in v4

Thanks,
Chris