regulator: Remove MAX8997_REG_BUCK1DVS/MAX8997_REG_BUCK2DVS/MAX8997_REG_BUCK5DVS macros

PATCH RESEND Applied Axel Lin 4 participants 4 messages May 16, 2011

Subsystems (2)

Multifunction devices (MFD) Voltage and current regulator framework

lore

Share & tools

lore

Axel Lin

author

2011-05-16 10:20 UTC #0 lore raw

PATCH RESEND 1/1 regulator: Remove MAX8997_REG_BUCK1DVS/MAX8997_REG_BUCK2DVS/MAX8997_REG_BUCK5DVS macros

In current implementation, the original macro implementation assumes the caller pass the parameter starting from 1 (to match the register names in datasheet). Thus we have unneeded plus one then minus one operations
when using MAX8997_REG_BUCK1DVS/MAX8997_REG_BUCK2DVS/MAX8997_REG_BUCK5DVS macros.

This patch removes these macros to avoid unneeded plus one then minus one operations without reducing readability.

Signed-off-by Axel Lin <[email protected]>

---
The (V1) original patch title was
[PATCH] regulator: Simplify MAX8997_REG_BUCK1DVS/MAX8997_REG_BUCK2DVS/MAX8997_REG_BUCK5DVS macros I change the patch title to meet the change.

Regards,
Axel

 drivers/regulator/max8997.c         |   12 ++++++------
 include/linux/mfd/max8997-private.h |    4 ----
 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

drivers/regulator/max8997.c +6 -6

index b1c1444..10d5a1d 100644
@@ -1032,11 +1032,11 @@ static __devinit int max8997_pmic_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 
 	/* For the safety, set max voltage before setting up */
 	for (i = 0; i < 8; i++) {
-		max8997_update_reg(i2c, MAX8997_REG_BUCK1DVS(i + 1),
+		max8997_update_reg(i2c, MAX8997_REG_BUCK1DVS1 + i,
 				max_buck1, 0x3f);
-		max8997_update_reg(i2c, MAX8997_REG_BUCK2DVS(i + 1),
+		max8997_update_reg(i2c, MAX8997_REG_BUCK2DVS1 + i,
 				max_buck2, 0x3f);
-		max8997_update_reg(i2c, MAX8997_REG_BUCK5DVS(i + 1),
+		max8997_update_reg(i2c, MAX8997_REG_BUCK5DVS1 + i,
 				max_buck5, 0x3f);
 	}

@@ -1113,13 +1113,13 @@ static __devinit int max8997_pmic_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 
 	/* Initialize all the DVS related BUCK registers */
 	for (i = 0; i < 8; i++) {
-		max8997_update_reg(i2c, MAX8997_REG_BUCK1DVS(i + 1),
+		max8997_update_reg(i2c, MAX8997_REG_BUCK1DVS1 + i,
 				max8997->buck1_vol[i],
 				0x3f);
-		max8997_update_reg(i2c, MAX8997_REG_BUCK2DVS(i + 1),
+		max8997_update_reg(i2c, MAX8997_REG_BUCK2DVS1 + i,
 				max8997->buck2_vol[i],
 				0x3f);
-		max8997_update_reg(i2c, MAX8997_REG_BUCK5DVS(i + 1),
+		max8997_update_reg(i2c, MAX8997_REG_BUCK5DVS1 + i,
 				max8997->buck5_vol[i],
 				0x3f);
 	}

include/linux/mfd/max8997-private.h +0 -4

index 69d1010..5ff2400 100644
@@ -311,10 +311,6 @@ enum max8997_irq {
 	MAX8997_IRQ_NR,
 };
 
-#define MAX8997_REG_BUCK1DVS(x)	(MAX8997_REG_BUCK1DVS1 + (x) - 1)
-#define MAX8997_REG_BUCK2DVS(x)	(MAX8997_REG_BUCK2DVS1 + (x) - 1)
-#define MAX8997_REG_BUCK5DVS(x)	(MAX8997_REG_BUCK5DVS1 + (x) - 1)
-
 #define MAX8997_NUM_GPIO	12
 struct max8997_dev {
 	struct device *dev;

Signature · 1 line

1.7.1

Kyungmin Park

Acked-by on v1 1/1

2011-05-16 10:22 UTC #1 lore raw

Acked-by Kyungmin Park <[email protected]>

Quoted 83 lines · Axel Lin

This patch removes these macros to avoid unneeded plus one then minus one operations without reducing readability.

Signed-off-by Axel Lin <[email protected]>

---
The (V1) original patch title was
[PATCH] regulator: Simplify MAX8997_REG_BUCK1DVS/MAX8997_REG_BUCK2DVS/MAX8997_REG_BUCK5DVS macros I change the patch title to meet the change.

Regards,
Axel

drivers/regulator/max8997.c | 12 ++++++------ include/linux/mfd/max8997-private.h | 4 ----

 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

drivers/regulator/max8997.c +6 -6

index b1c1444..10d5a1d 100644
@@ -1032,11 +1032,11 @@ static __devinit int max8997_pmic_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 
        /* For the safety, set max voltage before setting up */
        for (i = 0; i < 8; i++) {
-               max8997_update_reg(i2c, MAX8997_REG_BUCK1DVS(i + 1),
+               max8997_update_reg(i2c, MAX8997_REG_BUCK1DVS1 + i,
                                max_buck1, 0x3f);
-               max8997_update_reg(i2c, MAX8997_REG_BUCK2DVS(i + 1),
+               max8997_update_reg(i2c, MAX8997_REG_BUCK2DVS1 + i,
                                max_buck2, 0x3f);
-               max8997_update_reg(i2c, MAX8997_REG_BUCK5DVS(i + 1),
+               max8997_update_reg(i2c, MAX8997_REG_BUCK5DVS1 + i,
                                max_buck5, 0x3f);
        }

@@ -1113,13 +1113,13 @@ static __devinit int max8997_pmic_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 
        /* Initialize all the DVS related BUCK registers */
        for (i = 0; i < 8; i++) {
-               max8997_update_reg(i2c, MAX8997_REG_BUCK1DVS(i + 1),
+               max8997_update_reg(i2c, MAX8997_REG_BUCK1DVS1 + i,
                                max8997->buck1_vol[i],
                                0x3f);
-               max8997_update_reg(i2c, MAX8997_REG_BUCK2DVS(i + 1),
+               max8997_update_reg(i2c, MAX8997_REG_BUCK2DVS1 + i,
                                max8997->buck2_vol[i],
                                0x3f);
-               max8997_update_reg(i2c, MAX8997_REG_BUCK5DVS(i + 1),
+               max8997_update_reg(i2c, MAX8997_REG_BUCK5DVS1 + i,
                                max8997->buck5_vol[i],
                                0x3f);
        }

include/linux/mfd/max8997-private.h +0 -5

index 69d1010..5ff2400 100644
@@ -311,10 +311,6 @@ enum max8997_irq {
        MAX8997_IRQ_NR,
  };
 
-#define MAX8997_REG_BUCK1DVS(x)        (MAX8997_REG_BUCK1DVS1 + (x) - 1)
-#define MAX8997_REG_BUCK2DVS(x)        (MAX8997_REG_BUCK2DVS1 + (x) - 1)
-#define MAX8997_REG_BUCK5DVS(x)        (MAX8997_REG_BUCK5DVS1 + (x) - 1)
-
  #define MAX8997_NUM_GPIO       12
  struct max8997_dev {
        struct device *dev;
--

1.7.1

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Mark Brown

Acked-by on v1 1/1

2011-05-16 15:59 UTC #2 lore raw

In reply to Axel Lin

Quoted 3 lines · Axel Lin

In current implementation, the original macro implementation assumes the caller pass the parameter starting from 1 (to match the register names in datasheet). Thus we have unneeded plus one then minus one operations

Acked-by Mark Brown <[email protected]>

Liam Girdwood

Applied

2011-05-16 20:19 UTC #3 lore raw

In reply to Axel Lin

Quoted 10 lines · Axel Lin

In current implementation, the original macro implementation assumes the caller pass the parameter starting from 1 (to match the register names in datasheet). Thus we have unneeded plus one then minus one operations
when using MAX8997_REG_BUCK1DVS/MAX8997_REG_BUCK2DVS/MAX8997_REG_BUCK5DVS macros.
This patch removes these macros to avoid unneeded plus one then minus one operations without reducing readability.
Signed-off-by Axel Lin <[email protected]>
---

Applied.