On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>>>
>> Thanks Lars, all of your comments are valid and I will accordingly update.
>> I am waiting for some more review comments if there is any and will send
>> the updated code.
>
> Beware of that strategy as I for one am guilty of the old
Thanks Lars, all of your comments are valid and I will accordingly update.
I am waiting for some more review comments if there is any and will send
the updated code.
Beware of that strategy as I for one am guilty of the old approach of
'oh look someone else has commented, I'll wait for the
ne
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> On 09/10/2012 05:40 PM, anish kumar wrote:
>> From: anish kumar
>>
>> This is the cleaned up code after the valuable inputs from
>> the Jonathan, Lars and Anton.
>>
>> I have tried to accomodate all the concerns however please
>> let me
On 09/10/2012 05:40 PM, anish kumar wrote:
> From: anish kumar
>
> This is the cleaned up code after the valuable inputs from
> the Jonathan, Lars and Anton.
>
> I have tried to accomodate all the concerns however please
> let me know incase something is missed out.
>
> Signed-off-by: anish kum
From: anish kumar
This is the cleaned up code after the valuable inputs from
the Jonathan, Lars and Anton.
I have tried to accomodate all the concerns however please
let me know incase something is missed out.
Signed-off-by: anish kumar
---
drivers/power/generic-adc-battery.c | 431 +++
On 09/09/2012 10:46 AM, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> On 09/09/2012 11:32 AM, anish kumar wrote:
>> +channels = iio_channel_get_all(dev_name(&pdev->dev));
> I would give these explicit names and get the two individual channels by
> name. I think it will give you cleaner code.
>>>
On 09/09/2012 11:32 AM, anish kumar wrote:
> + channels = iio_channel_get_all(dev_name(&pdev->dev));
I would give these explicit names and get the two individual channels by
name. I think it will give you cleaner code.
>>> Yes, now it will be based on pdata->voltage_channel,
>>> pdat
On Sat, 2012-09-08 at 11:09 +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On 09/08/2012 08:10 AM, anish kumar wrote:
> > Thanks for your time.
> > On Fri, 2012-09-07 at 08:52 +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> >> On 02/09/12 16:39, anish kumar wrote:
> >>> From: anish kumar
> >>>
> >>> This patch is to use IIO t
On 09/08/2012 08:30 AM, anish kumar wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-09-07 at 10:49 +0200, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
>> On 09/02/2012 05:39 PM, anish kumar wrote:
>>> From: anish kumar
>>>
>>> This patch is to use IIO to write a generic batttery driver.
>>> There are some inherent assumptions here:
>>> 1.Use
On 09/08/2012 08:10 AM, anish kumar wrote:
> Thanks for your time.
> On Fri, 2012-09-07 at 08:52 +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>> On 02/09/12 16:39, anish kumar wrote:
>>> From: anish kumar
>>>
>>> This patch is to use IIO to write a generic batttery driver.
>> battery
>>> There are some inherent
On Sat, Sep 08, 2012 at 12:40:18PM +0530, anish kumar wrote:
[...]
> > > Signed-off-by: anish kumar
> > So what happened in 1985?
> Was hurrying to get an email id :)
I so much understand... ;-)
Much thanks to Lars-Peter and Jonathan, saved me a lot of time reviewing
the driver.
Anish, the idea
On Fri, 2012-09-07 at 10:49 +0200, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> On 09/02/2012 05:39 PM, anish kumar wrote:
> > From: anish kumar
> >
> > This patch is to use IIO to write a generic batttery driver.
> > There are some inherent assumptions here:
> > 1.User is having both main battery and backup batt
Thanks for your time.
On Fri, 2012-09-07 at 08:52 +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On 02/09/12 16:39, anish kumar wrote:
> > From: anish kumar
> >
> > This patch is to use IIO to write a generic batttery driver.
> battery
> > There are some inherent assumptions here:
> > 1.User is having both main
On 09/02/2012 05:39 PM, anish kumar wrote:
> From: anish kumar
>
> This patch is to use IIO to write a generic batttery driver.
> There are some inherent assumptions here:
> 1.User is having both main battery and backup battery.
> 2.Both batteries use same channel to get the information.
>
Hi t
On 02/09/12 16:39, anish kumar wrote:
From: anish kumar
This patch is to use IIO to write a generic batttery driver.
battery
There are some inherent assumptions here:
1.User is having both main battery and backup battery.
Seems rather like that could be easily enough relaxed or configured vi
On Sun, 2012-09-02 at 14:34 -0700, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 02, 2012 at 09:44:04PM +0530, Sannu K wrote: [...]
> > Just Curious what is the use of this module? Is there any user space
> > program uses this? When ACPI drivers for battery is available how
> > useful will this be?
>
> Tha
On Sun, Sep 02, 2012 at 09:44:04PM +0530, Sannu K wrote: [...]
> Just Curious what is the use of this module? Is there any user space
> program uses this? When ACPI drivers for battery is available how
> useful will this be?
That's mostly for embedded devices. They often have batteries directly
co
On Sun, Sep 2, 2012 at 9:09 PM, anish kumar wrote:
> From: anish kumar
>
> This patch is to use IIO to write a generic batttery driver.
> There are some inherent assumptions here:
> 1.User is having both main battery and backup battery.
> 2.Both batteries use same channel to get the information.
From: anish kumar
This patch is to use IIO to write a generic batttery driver.
There are some inherent assumptions here:
1.User is having both main battery and backup battery.
2.Both batteries use same channel to get the information.
Signed-off-by: anish kumar
---
drivers/power/Kconfig
19 matches
Mail list logo
