linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/4] mfd: rn5t618: Add of compatibles for ADC and power

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: <20210705120358.6bf737f7@aktux>
Date:   Mon, 5 Jul 2021 12:03:58 +0200
From:   Andreas Kemnade <andreas@...nade.info>
To:     Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
Cc:     Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
        Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>, <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        <lars@...afoo.de>, <sre@...nel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-iio@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>, <leonard.crestez@....com>,
        <letux-kernel@...nphoenux.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] mfd: rn5t618: Add of compatibles for ADC and power

On Mon, 5 Jul 2021 09:31:29 +0100
Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 5 Jul 2021 08:36:08 +0100
> Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, 03 Jul 2021, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> >   
> > > On Sat,  3 Jul 2021 10:42:22 +0200
> > > Andreas Kemnade <andreas@...nade.info> wrote:
> > >     
> > > > This allows having devicetree nodes for the subdevices.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Andreas Kemnade <andreas@...nade.info>
> > > > ---
> > > >  drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c | 6 ++++--
> > > >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c b/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c
> > > > index 384acb459427..b916c7471ca3 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c
> > > > @@ -24,8 +24,10 @@ static const struct mfd_cell rn5t618_cells[] = {
> > > >  };
> > > >  
> > > >  static const struct mfd_cell rc5t619_cells[] = {
> > > > -	{ .name = "rn5t618-adc" },
> > > > -	{ .name = "rn5t618-power" },
> > > > +	{ .name = "rn5t618-adc",
> > > > +	  .of_compatible = "ricoh,rc5t619-adc" },    
> > > 
> > > Odd to have a name of 618 and a compatible of 619.  Why?
> > > Definitely deserves a comment if this is necessary for some reason!    
> > 
> > Actually this is the norm.  We have lots of drivers named after the
> > *first* device they supported before expansion.  
> 
> Ah. I'd missed that this cells array is specific to the 5t619, though if
> the driver is the same I'd also expect it to be needed for the 5t618 entry.
> 
Well, yes, it is needed for the 5t618 also. But if I would add it, it
would be untested. And that second shorter array is also used for the
rn5t567 which does not have an ADC, So I we need three arrays there.

Regards,
Andreas