From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758654AbcFAP3l (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Jun 2016 11:29:41 -0400 Received: from nat-hk.nvidia.com ([203.18.50.4]:40133 "EHLO hkmmgate101.nvidia.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753449AbcFAP3j (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Jun 2016 11:29:39 -0400 X-PGP-Universal: processed; by hkpgpgate101.nvidia.com on Wed, 01 Jun 2016 08:29:36 -0700 Subject: Re: [PATCH] mfd: max77620: Fix FPS switch statements To: Lee Jones References: <1463075104-26924-1-git-send-email-rklein@nvidia.com> <5734C2C2.2060207@nvidia.com> <9716c1c8-dd2b-8444-6ec9-567d07fe8971@nvidia.com> <20160531073022.GA1729@dell> CC: Laxman Dewangan , , From: Rhyland Klein Message-ID: <55393f24-75ce-67b3-2933-3b7aeccb12ce@nvidia.com> Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2016 11:29:29 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160531073022.GA1729@dell> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 5/31/2016 3:30 AM, Lee Jones wrote: > On Fri, 27 May 2016, Rhyland Klein wrote: > >> On 5/12/2016 1:52 PM, Laxman Dewangan wrote: >>> >>> On Thursday 12 May 2016 11:15 PM, Rhyland Klein wrote: >>>> When configuring FPS during probe, assuming a DT node is present for >>>> FPS, the code can run into a problem with the switch statements in >>>> max77620_config_fps() and max77620_get_fps_period_reg_value(). Namely, >>>> in the case of chip->chip_id == MAX77620, it will set >>>> fps_[mix|max]_period but then fall through to the default switch case >>>> and return -EINVAL. Returning this from max77620_config_fps() will >>>> cause probe to fail. >>>> >>> >>> Thanks for fixes. >>> Missed when converting if-else to switch. >>> >>> Reviewed-by: Laxman Dewangan >>> >> >> Lee, I noticed this hasn't been merged yet, but without it platforms >> using the max77620 can easily (if it has FPS nodes) fail to probe. Is >> there anything blocking it? > > Yes, it was sent too late in the cycle. > Ok, thanks. -rhyland -- nvpublic