linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH V1] mfd: da9063: Add device tree support

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <6ED8E3B22081A4459DAC7699F3695FB7D0B52C08@SW-EX-MBX02.diasemi.com>
Date:	Mon, 19 Jan 2015 14:22:59 +0000
From:	"Opensource [Steve Twiss]" <stwiss.opensource@...semi.com>
To:	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
CC:	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
	Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
	Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
	"Mark Rutland" <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>,
	DT <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	David Dajun Chen <david.chen@...semi.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...aro.org>,
	"Philipp Zabel" <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>,
	Support Opensource <Support.Opensource@...semi.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH V1] mfd: da9063: Add device tree support

On 19 January 2015 09:54, Lee Jones wrote:

> On Wed, 14 Jan 2015, Steve Twiss wrote:
> > From: Steve Twiss <stwiss.opensource@...semi.com>
> >
> > ---
> > Checks performed with linux-next/v3.19-rc4/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> >  da9063.txt                total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 94 lines checked
> >  da9063-core.c             total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 192 lines checked
> >  da9063-i2c.c              total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 277 lines checked
> >  core.h                    total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 99 lines checked
> 
> There is no need to put this in here really.  It is assumed that
> checkpatch.pl has been run and that no warnings/errors exists.
> 

ok -- I will remove this in future

[...]

> > +Required properties:
> > +
> > +- compatible : Should be "dlg,da9063-ca", "dlg,da9063-bb" or/and
> > +  "dlg,da9063-ad".
> 
> What are 'ca', 'bb' and 'ad'?

There are multiple variants of the DA9063 chip -- historical support.
The AD chip has a different register map to BB and CA  silicon and the
variant information is read from the chip at run-time and used to set
up the correct regmap_config tables during initialisation.

[...]

> > +++ b/drivers/mfd/da9063-core.c
> > @@ -85,6 +85,7 @@ static const struct mfd_cell da9063_devs[] = {
> >  		.name		= DA9063_DRVNAME_LEDS,
> >  	},
> >  	{
> > +		.of_compatible = "dlg,da9063-watchdog",
> 
> Can you put the of_compatible attribute at the end of the structure
> please?
> 
> >  		.name		= DA9063_DRVNAME_WATCHDOG,
> >  	},
> >  	{
> > @@ -98,6 +99,7 @@ static const struct mfd_cell da9063_devs[] = {
> >  		.resources	= da9063_onkey_resources,
> >  	},
> >  	{
> > +		.of_compatible = "dlg,da9063-rtc",
> 
> Same here.

Sure.

[...]
> >
> > +static const struct of_device_id da9063_dt_ids[] = {
> > +	{ .compatible = "dlg,da9063-ad", },
> > +	{ .compatible = "dlg,da9063-bb", },
> > +	{ .compatible = "dlg,da9063-ca", },
> 
> Why is there a need to differientiae between 'ad', 'bb' and 'ca'
> (whatever they are)?

As described above.

> > +	{ /* sentinel */ }
> 
> Nit: You can drop this comment.

ok.

[...]

I will also make changes to separate into multiple patches
as described in https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/1/19/149
Will re-send as patch V2 ...

Regards,
Steve