On Mon, Aug 05, 2019 at 01:21:55PM +0800, Hsin-Hsiung Wang wrote: > +static const u32 vmch_voltages[] = { > + 2900000, 3000000, 3300000, > +};
> +static const u32 vemc_voltages[] = { > + 2900000, 3000000, 3300000, > +}; Several of these tables appear to be identical. > +static inline unsigned int mt6358_map_mode(unsigned int mode) > +{ > + return mode == MT6358_BUCK_MODE_AUTO ? > + REGULATOR_MODE_NORMAL : REGULATOR_MODE_FAST; > +} There is no need for this to be an inline and please write normal conditional statements to improve legibility. There's other examples in the driver. > +static int mt6358_get_buck_voltage_sel(struct regulator_dev *rdev) > +{ > + int ret, regval; > + struct mt6358_regulator_info *info = rdev_get_drvdata(rdev); > + > + ret = regmap_read(rdev->regmap, info->da_vsel_reg, ®val); > + if (ret != 0) { > + dev_info(&rdev->dev, > + "Failed to get mt6358 Buck %s vsel reg: %d\n", > + info->desc.name, ret); dev_err() for errors here and throughout the driver. > + return ret; > + } > + > + ret = (regval >> info->da_vsel_shift) & info->da_vsel_mask; > + > + return ret; > +} This looks like a standard get_voltage_sel_regmap()? > +err_mode: > + if (ret != 0) > + return ret; > + > + return 0; Or just return ret unconditionally?
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature