On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 06:58:56AM +0000, Vaittinen, Matti wrote:
> On Tue, 2020-03-24 at 14:24 +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 10:30:54AM +0200, Matti Vaittinen wrote:

> > >  
> > > -		if (!(min_uV <= linear_max_uV && max_uV >= range-
> > > >min_uV))
> > > +		ret = linear_range_get_selector_high(range, min_uV,
> > > &sel,
> > > +						     &found);
> > > +		if (ret)
> > >  			continue;

> > Why are these going for _get_selector_high()?  Usually we try to
> > choose
> > the lowest voltage we can.

> I tried to maintain the existing logic - which is (if I am not
> mistaken) to search for first value which is equal or higher than the
> minimum. Hence we use the linear_range_get_selector_high() - which does
> not return selector for voltage smaller than given value (minimum).

OK, that's a bit confusingly named then - I'd read that as finding the
highest value within the range without registering that the function
only takes a single value so can't verify if the selector is in range or
not.  I'll also need to check that the modified code verifies that the
selector returned is within range.