Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/3] misc:pmic: Support for voltage to register value conversion function
On 28/03/2012 14:38, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
Hi Stefano,
Hi Lucasz,
I've already forwarded those patches to you. They are also available on the mailing list, so I don't know what has happened.
Really nothing, I got all e-mails, I was only not able to explain my doubt. I try again:
- In patch 1/3 you add voltage_to_reg to the pmic struct ==> Ok - in patch 2/3 you add voltage_to_reg to MAX8997. ==> Ok
Everything clear.
The consequence for me is that PATCH 3/3 shows the reason to add voltage_to_reg(), and calls the new function pmic_vol_to_reg(), because you need it, as you have already explained. But I see only pmic_set_output() and pmic_reg_write() in your patch.
What have I not yet understood ? (maybe I need a coffe to wake up my brain...)
Stefano
On Wed, 28 Mar 2012 14:50:35 +0200 Stefano Babic sbabic@denx.de wrote:
On 28/03/2012 14:38, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
Hi Stefano,
Hi Lucasz,
I've already forwarded those patches to you. They are also available on the mailing list, so I don't know what has happened.
Really nothing, I got all e-mails, I was only not able to explain my doubt. I try again:
- In patch 1/3 you add voltage_to_reg to the pmic struct ==> Ok
- in patch 2/3 you add voltage_to_reg to MAX8997. ==> Ok
Everything clear.
The consequence for me is that PATCH 3/3 shows the reason to add voltage_to_reg(), and calls the new function pmic_vol_to_reg(), because you need it, as you have already explained. But I see only pmic_set_output() and pmic_reg_write() in your patch.
Stefano
Hi Stefano,
I've looked on patches which I've posted and for patches from 1 do 3 there isn't usage for this function.
However I'm using this functionality in a code on which I'm working on (Trats), so posting it to the list is only a matter of time.
What have I not yet understood ? (maybe I need a coffe to wake up my brain...)
You understood everything :-), it was my fault. I thought, that patches 2/3 and 3/3 were missing (or by some mishap I didn't send them properly).
Now, I think, that everything is clear.
On 28/03/2012 15:13, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
Hi Stefano,
Hi Lucasz,
I've looked on patches which I've posted and for patches from 1 do 3 there isn't usage for this function.
However I'm using this functionality in a code on which I'm working on (Trats), so posting it to the list is only a matter of time.
ok, understood. Then I will suggest you resubmit patches 1 and 2 with your work on Trats, because the patches belong together and they should be in the same patchset.
And Patch 3 can be already applied as it is, because it has no dependecies with the other ones.
Now, I think, that everything is clear.
Yes, everythg clear ;-)
Best regards, Stefano Babic
Hi Stefano,
On Wed, 28 Mar 2012 16:43:51 +0200 Stefano Babic sbabic@denx.de wrote:
ok, understood. Then I will suggest you resubmit patches 1 and 2 with your work on Trats, because the patches belong together and they should be in the same patchset.
Hmm, I'm not the only one who is working on this board. Moreover some other targets are using this PMIC as well :-).
And Patch 3 can be already applied as it is, because it has no dependecies with the other ones.
The patch 3/3 depends on patch 2, which defines data for MAX8997 PMIC. And patch 2 depends on patch 1, since patch 1 provides:
+ int (*voltage_to_reg_conv) (int uV);
which function is defined in patch 2 :-).
participants (2)
-
Lukasz Majewski -
Stefano Babic