[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a9fbf785-0dab-2e55-5983-ea279f8dc3a2@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2021 21:24:38 +0200
From: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
To: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc: Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>, C++ / GCC <cpp@....lt>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mfd: axp20x: Add supplied-from property to
axp288_fuel_gauge cell
Hi Lee,
On 7/19/21 12:48 PM, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Jul 2021, Hans de Goede wrote:
>
>> The power-supply framework has the notion of one power-supply device
>> being supplied by another. A typical example of this is a charger
>> charging a battery.
>>
>> A tablet getting plugged in to charge (or plugged out) only results in
>> events seen by the axp288_charger device / MFD cell. Which means that
>> a change udev-event only gets send for the charger power-supply class
>> device, not for the battery (the axp288_fuel_gauge device).
>>
>> The axp288_fuel_gauge does have an external_power_change'd callback
>> which will generate a change udev-event when called. But before this
>> commit this never got called because the power-supply core only calls
>> this when a power-supply class device's supplier changes and the
>> supplier link from axp288_charger to axp288_fuel_gauge was missing.
>>
>> Add a "supplied-from" property to axp288_fuel_gauge cell, pointing
>> to the "axp288_charger" power-supply class device, so that the
>> axp288_fuel_gauge's external_power_change'd callback gets called on
>> axp288_charger state changes.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/mfd/axp20x.c | 13 +++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/axp20x.c b/drivers/mfd/axp20x.c
>> index d0ac019850d1..8161a5dc68e8 100644
>> --- a/drivers/mfd/axp20x.c
>> +++ b/drivers/mfd/axp20x.c
>> @@ -700,6 +700,18 @@ static const struct resource axp288_charger_resources[] = {
>> DEFINE_RES_IRQ(AXP288_IRQ_CBTO),
>> };
>>
>> +static const char * const axp288_fuel_gauge_suppliers[] = { "axp288_charger" };
>> +
>> +static const struct property_entry axp288_fuel_gauge_properties[] = {
>> + PROPERTY_ENTRY_STRING_ARRAY("supplied-from", axp288_fuel_gauge_suppliers),
>> + { }
>> +};
>> +
>> +static const struct software_node axp288_fuel_gauge_sw_node = {
>> + .name = "axp288_fuel_gauge",
>> + .properties = axp288_fuel_gauge_properties,
>> +};
>> +
>> static const struct mfd_cell axp288_cells[] = {
>> {
>> .name = "axp288_adc",
>> @@ -717,6 +729,7 @@ static const struct mfd_cell axp288_cells[] = {
>> .name = "axp288_fuel_gauge",
>> .num_resources = ARRAY_SIZE(axp288_fuel_gauge_resources),
>> .resources = axp288_fuel_gauge_resources,
>> + .swnode = &axp288_fuel_gauge_sw_node,
>> }, {
>> .name = "axp221-pek",
>> .num_resources = ARRAY_SIZE(axp288_power_button_resources),
>
> That's a lot of code to pass a string.
>
> Is this really the most efficient method?
Currently there is no other method to provide information about the supplier
consumer relation for non device-tree platforms (in device-tree platforms
this info is present inside the device-tree), so yes this is the most
efficient method available.
Regards,
Hans
Powered by blists - more mailing lists