linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 12/12] mfd: bd9571mwv: Add support for BD9574MWF

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: <1f13ab9c0902ed23511b0d393e633e0d7a7abc71.camel@fi.rohmeurope.com>
Date:   Tue, 22 Dec 2020 09:39:21 +0000
From:   "Vaittinen, Matti" <Matti.Vaittinen@...rohmeurope.com>
To:     "yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@...esas.com" <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@...esas.com>,
        "geert@...ux-m68k.org" <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
CC:     "khiem.nguyen.xt@...esas.com" <khiem.nguyen.xt@...esas.com>,
        "broonie@...nel.org" <broonie@...nel.org>,
        "bgolaszewski@...libre.com" <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>,
        linux-power <linux-power@...rohmeurope.com>,
        "linus.walleij@...aro.org" <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        "lee.jones@...aro.org" <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
        "linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org" 
        <linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
        "lgirdwood@...il.com" <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        "marek.vasut+renesas@...il.com" <marek.vasut+renesas@...il.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 12/12] mfd: bd9571mwv: Add support for BD9574MWF


On Tue, 2020-12-22 at 09:23 +0000, Yoshihiro Shimoda wrote:
> Hi Geert-san,
> 
> Thank you for your review!
> 
> > From: Geert Uytterhoeven, Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2020 5:53 PM
> > On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 3:56 AM Yoshihiro Shimoda
> > <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@...esas.com> wrote:
> <snip>
> > > --- a/drivers/mfd/bd9571mwv.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/mfd/bd9571mwv.c
> > > @@ -200,12 +277,14 @@ static int bd9571mwv_probe(struct
> > > i2c_client *client,
> > > 
> > >  static const struct of_device_id bd9571mwv_of_match_table[] = {
> > >         { .compatible = "rohm,bd9571mwv", },
> > > +       { .compatible = "rohm,bd9574mwf", },
> > >         { /* sentinel */ }
> > >  };
> > >  MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, bd9571mwv_of_match_table);
> > > 
> > >  static const struct i2c_device_id bd9571mwv_id_table[] = {
> > > -       { "bd9571mwv", 0 },
> > > +       { "bd9571mwv", ROHM_CHIP_TYPE_BD9571 },
> > > +       { "bd9574mwf", ROHM_CHIP_TYPE_BD9574 },
> > 
> > Why add the chip types?  These are unused, and the driver uses
> > autodetection of the chip variant anyway.
> 
> I just added the chip types in the future use. As you said,
> these are unused and we should not add a future use in general.
> So, I'll remove this change.
> 
> Also, I think I should remove the following patch.
> 
> [PATCH v4 08/12] gpio: bd9571mwv: Add BD9574MWF support

I think this depends on whether you wish to add support for the

> "RECOV_GPOUT", "FREQSEL" and "RTC_IN",

which you mention in GPIO commit message. If you plan on adding the
support, then you need to differentiate the ICs on GPIO driver, right?

Best Regards
    Matti Vaittinen