From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755193AbcFQGmQ (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Jun 2016 02:42:16 -0400 Received: from mailout4.w1.samsung.com ([210.118.77.14]:55145 "EHLO mailout4.w1.samsung.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752665AbcFQGmO (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Jun 2016 02:42:14 -0400 X-AuditID: cbfec7f4-f796c6d000001486-7f-57639bc3e886 Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/7] max8903: cleans up confusing relationship between dc_valid, dok and dcm. To: chris@lapa.com.au, dwmw2@infradead.org, dbaryshkov@gmail.com, sre@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com, robh+dt@kernel.org References: <1464849897-21527-3-git-send-email-chris@lapa.com.au> <1466139626-51434-1-git-send-email-chris@lapa.com.au> <1466139626-51434-4-git-send-email-chris@lapa.com.au> <57639832.6000201@samsung.com> <32bde516-87b5-bb63-c6a3-1ec043758904@lapa.com.au> Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org From: Krzysztof Kozlowski Message-id: <57639BC1.4060604@samsung.com> Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2016 08:42:09 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.8.0 MIME-version: 1.0 In-reply-to: <32bde516-87b5-bb63-c6a3-1ec043758904@lapa.com.au> Content-type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFnrPLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsVy+t/xy7qHZyeHG2z6xGLx8IyZxaQn75kt 5h85x2oxceVkZovXLwwtLu+aw2bxufcIo8XS6xeZLFr3HmG3OL27xIHLY828NYweO2fdZffY vELLY9OqTjaPZXM3M3r0bVnF6PF5k1wAexSXTUpqTmZZapG+XQJXxu62BewFvwUr3p7TaGB8 xdvFyMkhIWAi0fttJiOELSZx4d56ti5GLg4hgaWMErcn7WWHcJ4xSjxZ8JIVpEpYIE3i1dun YB0iAjUS9/9dYYYoameS6Nu1A6yIWSBCovPBIXYQm03AWGLz8iVsIDavgJbEl9aFYHEWAVWJ Iwt2gQ0SBaqftf0HE0SNoMSPyfdYQGxOAXuJbafbgWwOoJl6EvcvakGMl5fYvOYt8wRGgVlI OmYhVM1CUrWAkXkVo2hqaXJBcVJ6rqFecWJucWleul5yfu4mRkg0fNnBuPiY1SFGAQ5GJR7e FaLJ4UKsiWXFlbmHGCU4mJVEeDWnA4V4UxIrq1KL8uOLSnNSiw8xSnOwKInzzt31PkRIID2x JDU7NbUgtQgmy8TBKdXAyJo6/4G+y9GiaA6tmRPCW5bMP2/0wEpG9GJN/bWa2Ce61aXKUjvO vZpes3r5r9f/CuYeLVr23tK+Qi+MOWUKQ5niR7+9x99ybd4Wv4J9k9Y5wfmXU5Ylll3fONVr Qv+hnSr9Z4XeKW/t9LXIlqmVyOmf8+v1uZ5XO5ftXPN1sc/00BaBeLVrv5RYijMSDbWYi4oT AfD9e9+CAgAA Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 06/17/2016 08:28 AM, Chris Lapa wrote: > On 17/06/2016 4:26 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 06/17/2016 07:00 AM, Chris Lapa wrote: >>> From: Chris Lapa >>> >>> 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 >>> --- >>> 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"); > I saw that one as well when I ran checkpatch, however I thought if I > changed it then I would get a warning about the line being > 80 chars. > So wasn't sure which direction to go. Checkpatch shouldn't complain on strings so if you move the string to next line, it should be ok. Best regards, Krzysztof