linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 07/10] gpio: bd9571mwv: Add BD9574MWF 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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 11 Dec 2020 12:55:05 +0000
From:   "Vaittinen, Matti" <Matti.Vaittinen@...rohmeurope.com>
To:     "lgirdwood@...il.com" <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        "marek.vasut+renesas@...il.com" <marek.vasut+renesas@...il.com>,
        "yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@...esas.com" <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@...esas.com>,
        "broonie@...nel.org" <broonie@...nel.org>,
        "bgolaszewski@...libre.com" <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>,
        "lee.jones@...aro.org" <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
        "linus.walleij@...aro.org" <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
CC:     linux-power <linux-power@...rohmeurope.com>,
        "linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        "khiem.nguyen.xt@...esas.com" <khiem.nguyen.xt@...esas.com>,
        "linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org" 
        <linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 07/10] gpio: bd9571mwv: Add BD9574MWF support


On Fri, 2020-12-11 at 20:27 +0900, Yoshihiro Shimoda wrote:
> Add support for BD9574MWF which is silimar chip with BD9571MWV.
> Note that BD9574MWF has an additional feature, but doesn't
> support it for now.

nit:
Perhaps mention which feature? And I think you mean the driver does not
support it yet?

> 
> Signed-off-by: Yoshihiro Shimoda <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@...esas.com>

FWIW:
Reviewed-By: Matti Vaittinen <matti.vaittinen@...rohmeurope.com>

> ---
>  drivers/gpio/gpio-bd9571mwv.c | 6 ++++--
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-bd9571mwv.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-
> bd9571mwv.c
> index 0e5395f..df6102b 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-bd9571mwv.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-bd9571mwv.c
> @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
>  // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
>  /*
> - * ROHM BD9571MWV-M GPIO driver
> + * ROHM BD9571MWV-M and BD9574MWF-M GPIO driver
>   *
>   * Copyright (C) 2017 Marek Vasut <marek.vasut+renesas@...il.com>
>   *
> @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@
>   */
>  
>  #include <linux/gpio/driver.h>
> +#include <linux/mfd/rohm-generic.h>
>  #include <linux/module.h>
>  #include <linux/platform_device.h>
>  
> @@ -118,7 +119,8 @@ static int bd9571mwv_gpio_probe(struct
> platform_device *pdev)
>  }
>  
>  static const struct platform_device_id bd9571mwv_gpio_id_table[] = {
> -	{ "bd9571mwv-gpio", },
> +	{ "bd9571mwv-gpio", ROHM_CHIP_TYPE_BD9571 },
> +	{ "bd9574mwf-gpio", ROHM_CHIP_TYPE_BD9574 },

I guess these CHIP_TYPES are used by subsequent patches?

I guess this means the existing functionality in both chips is same,
right? (GPIO register addresses etc? - I don't have BD9571 data-sheet
so I can't check)

>  	{ /* sentinel */ }
>  };
>  MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(platform, bd9571mwv_gpio_id_table);