Hi Axel,
O 五, 12月 29, 2017 at 02:12:18下午 +0800, Axel Lin wrote:
> The define for SC2731_WR_UNLOCK and SC2731_PWR_WR_PROT_VALUE are
> swapped, so the code calling regmap_write() looks strange. Fix it.
> regmap_write takes reg parameter first then val.
>
> Signed-off-by: Axel Lin <axel....@ingics.com>
> ---
> Hi Erick,
> I don't have the datasheet. Can you check this?
These definitions are following our datasheet's naming rule, may seem
puzzling. And your patch could be better, my suggestions are as follows.
Thanks,
> Thanks,
> Axel
> drivers/regulator/sc2731-regulator.c | 8 ++++----
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/regulator/sc2731-regulator.c
> b/drivers/regulator/sc2731-regulator.c
> index 794fcd504b3d..7f2b137bb98a 100644
> --- a/drivers/regulator/sc2731-regulator.c
> +++ b/drivers/regulator/sc2731-regulator.c
> @@ -13,8 +13,8 @@
> /*
> * SC2731 regulator lock register
> */
> -#define SC2731_PWR_WR_PROT_VALUE 0xf0c
> -#define SC2731_WR_UNLOCK 0x6e7f
> +#define SC2731_WR_UNLOCK 0xf0c
> +#define SC2731_PWR_WR_PROT_VALUE 0x6e7f
#define SC2731_PWR_WR_PROT 0xf0c
#define SC2731_WR_UNLOCK_VALUE 0x6e7f
> /*
> * SC2731 enable register
> @@ -203,8 +203,8 @@ static struct regulator_desc regulators[] = {
>
> static int sc2731_regulator_unlock(struct regmap *regmap)
> {
> - return regmap_write(regmap, SC2731_PWR_WR_PROT_VALUE,
> - SC2731_WR_UNLOCK);
> + return regmap_write(regmap, SC2731_WR_UNLOCK,
> + SC2731_PWR_WR_PROT_VALUE);
return regmap_write(regmap, SC2731_PWR_WR_PROT,
SC2731_WR_UNLOCK_VALUE);
> }
>
> static int sc2731_regulator_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> --
> 2.14.1
>
