Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] regulator: pf8x00: add support of nxp pf8x00 regulator

[Mark Brown]

On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 11:16:29PM +0100, Adrien Grassein wrote:

> +	{ .compatible = "nxp,pf8200",},
> +	{ }
> +};
> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, pf8x_dt_ids);
> +
> +const struct id_name id_list[] = {
> +	{PF8100, "PF8100"},
> +	{PF8121A, "PF8121A"},
> +	{PF8200, "PF8200"},
> +	{0, "???"},
> +};

It's strange to see the list terminated with this ??? entry - these
things usually have a NULL for both the ID and the string.  The string
on the terminator is never used so may as well stick with the usual
pattern.

> +static int encode_phase(struct pf8x_chip *pf, int phase)
> +{
> +	int ph;
> +
> +	if (phase < 0)
> +		return -1;
> +
> +	ph = phase / 45;
> +	if ((ph * 45) != phase) {
> +		dev_err(pf->dev, "ignoring, illegal phase %d\n", phase);
> +		return -1;
> +	}
> +
> +	return (ph >= 1) ? ph - 1 : 7;

As I said on the previousl review please write normal condidional
statements to improve the legibility of the code.

> +static inline struct regulator_init_data *match_init_data(int index)
> +{
> +	return pf8x00_matches[index].init_data;
> +}
> +
> +static inline struct device_node *match_of_node(int index)
> +{
> +	return pf8x00_matches[index].of_node;
> +}

If you need these your driver has a problem, as previously advised
please use the standard DT parsing support.

> +	memcpy(pf->regulator_descs, pf8x00_regulators,
> +		sizeof(pf->regulator_descs));

Why do you need to take a copy of this?  The descriptors should not be
being modified.

> +	num_regulators = ARRAY_SIZE(pf->regulator_descs);
> +	for (i = 0; i < num_regulators; i++) {
> +		struct regulator_init_data *init_data;
> +		struct regulator_desc *desc;
> +
> +		desc = &pf->regulator_descs[i].desc;
> +		init_data = match_init_data(i);
> +
> +		config.dev = &client->dev;
> +		config.init_data = init_data;
> +		config.driver_data = pf;
> +		config.of_node = match_of_node(i);
> +		config.ena_gpiod = NULL;

You've not done anything to parse the init data (which is good) so the
init data handling is at best redundant.

> +		if ((i >= REG_SW1) && (i <= REG_SW7)) {

> +			if (mask) {
> +				ret = regmap_update_bits(pf->regmap, reg, mask,
> +						val);
> +			}
> +
> +			if (fast_slew > 1) {
> +				ret = regmap_read(pf->regmap, reg, &fast_slew);
> +				fast_slew &= 0x20;
> +				if (ret < 0)
> +					fast_slew = 0;
> +				pf->regulator_descs[i].fast_slew = fast_slew >> 5;
> +			}

May as well just write configurations out when you parse them, no need
to defer to here and it makes things simpler.

> +module_i2c_driver(pf8x_driver);
> +
> +static void __exit pf8x_exit(void)
> +{
> +	i2c_del_driver(&pf8x_driver);
> +}
> +module_exit(pf8x_exit);

Does this build cleanly?  module_i2c_driver() does both the add and
delete.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature