linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V10 2/6] mfd: max77620: add core driver for MAX77620/MAX20024

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

Message-ID: <20160428072559.GK4892@dell>
Date:	Thu, 28 Apr 2016 08:25:59 +0100
From:	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
To:	Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>
Cc:	linus.walleij@...aro.org, robh+dt@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com,
	gnurou@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk, swarren@...dia.com,
	treding@...dia.com, Mallikarjun Kasoju <mkasoju@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V10 2/6] mfd: max77620: add core driver for
 MAX77620/MAX20024

On Wed, 27 Apr 2016, Laxman Dewangan wrote:

> 
> On Wednesday 27 April 2016 08:49 PM, Lee Jones wrote:
> >On Wed, 30 Mar 2016, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
> >
> >>+#define MAX77620_MFD_CELL_RES(_name, _res)			\
> >>+	{							\
> >>+		.name = (_name),				\
> >>+		.resources = (_res),				\
> >>+		.num_resources = ARRAY_SIZE((_res)),		\
> >>+	}
> >I'm *still* not accepting this.
> >
> >>+
> >>+static struct mfd_cell max20024_children[] = {
> >>+	MAX77620_MFD_CELL_NAME("max20024-pinctrl"),
> >>+	MAX77620_MFD_CELL_RES("max20024-gpio", gpio_resources),
> >>+	MAX77620_MFD_CELL_NAME("max20024-pmic"),
> >>+	MAX77620_MFD_CELL_RES("max77620-rtc", rtc_resources),
> >>+	MAX77620_MFD_CELL_RES("max20024-power", power_resources),
> >>+	MAX77620_MFD_CELL_NAME("max20024-watchdog"),
> >>+	MAX77620_MFD_CELL_NAME("max20024-clock"),
> >>+};
> >If you want this submission to be accepted this cycle, you're going to
> >have to convert this to the traditional way of defining MFD children.
> 
> Yaah, I want to have this in current cycle.
> Will it be fine as follows? (To have quick agreement)
> 
> static const struct mfd_cell max77620_children[] = {
>         {
>                 .name = "max77620-pinctrl",
>         }, {
>                 .name = "max77620-gpio",
>                 .resource = gpio_resources,
>                 .num_resources = ARRAY_SIZE(gpio_resources),
>         }, {
>         /* and so on */
>         },
> };

Yes.  Although, if there are no run-time ordering dependencies, I
usually like to a) have the one line entries on one line i.e.

         { .name = "max77620-pinctrl" }

... and b) for all the one line entries to be grouped together and
the multi line ones grouped together as well.

> >
> >>+		if (x >= tperiod)
> >>+			return i;
> >>+	}
> >>+
> >>+	return i;
> >>+}
> >>+
> >>+static int max77620_config_fps(struct max77620_chip *chip,
> >>+			       struct device_node *fps_np)
> >Lots of mention of 'FPS' here, but noting to so what that is?
> >
> >What does FPS stand for and what does the FPS do?
> 
> FPS is Flexible Power Sequence. It is explained in DT binding doc.
> 
> However, I will document the function to make it more clear in next
> revision.
> 

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog