Commit 3f1a9e63 authored by Andreas Kemnade's avatar Andreas Kemnade Committed by Mark Brown

regulator: rn5t618: fix rc5t619 ldo10 enable

LDO9 and LDO10 were listed with the same enable bits.
That looks insane and there are no provisions in the code for handling such
a special case. Also other out-of-tree drivers use a separate bit to
enable it.
Example:
https://github.com/brunotl/kernel-kobo-mx6sl-ntx/blob/master/drivers/regulator/ricoh619-regulator.c
So it seems to be clearly a bug.
I cannot fully check it on my board without schematics and just discovered
this during code analysis for another problem.
Signed-off-by: default avatarAndreas Kemnade <andreas@kemnade.info>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191113182643.23885-1-andreas@kemnade.infoSigned-off-by: default avatarMark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
parent b59b6544
...@@ -90,7 +90,7 @@ static const struct regulator_desc rc5t619_regulators[] = { ...@@ -90,7 +90,7 @@ static const struct regulator_desc rc5t619_regulators[] = {
REG(LDO7, LDOEN1, BIT(6), LDO7DAC, 0x7f, 900000, 3500000, 25000), REG(LDO7, LDOEN1, BIT(6), LDO7DAC, 0x7f, 900000, 3500000, 25000),
REG(LDO8, LDOEN1, BIT(7), LDO8DAC, 0x7f, 900000, 3500000, 25000), REG(LDO8, LDOEN1, BIT(7), LDO8DAC, 0x7f, 900000, 3500000, 25000),
REG(LDO9, LDOEN2, BIT(0), LDO9DAC, 0x7f, 900000, 3500000, 25000), REG(LDO9, LDOEN2, BIT(0), LDO9DAC, 0x7f, 900000, 3500000, 25000),
REG(LDO10, LDOEN2, BIT(0), LDO10DAC, 0x7f, 900000, 3500000, 25000), REG(LDO10, LDOEN2, BIT(1), LDO10DAC, 0x7f, 900000, 3500000, 25000),
/* LDO RTC */ /* LDO RTC */
REG(LDORTC1, LDOEN2, BIT(4), LDORTCDAC, 0x7f, 1700000, 3500000, 25000), REG(LDORTC1, LDOEN2, BIT(4), LDORTCDAC, 0x7f, 1700000, 3500000, 25000),
REG(LDORTC2, LDOEN2, BIT(5), LDORTC2DAC, 0x7f, 900000, 3500000, 25000), REG(LDORTC2, LDOEN2, BIT(5), LDORTC2DAC, 0x7f, 900000, 3500000, 25000),
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment