[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHp75Vd8KFCZ0kDSuhbqxGBu66KhcGO9zHPshncB7vZzsHnNDg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2021 21:53:41 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: Tsuchiya Yuto <kitakar@...il.com>
Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>,
Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/1] add ccove PMIC i2c address for Microsoft Surface 3
On Sun, Oct 17, 2021 at 7:16 PM Tsuchiya Yuto <kitakar@...il.com> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Firstly, I'm still not used to Linux patch sending flow. Sorry in advance
> if there is some weirdness :-) but I did my best.
>
> I need to use the function intel_soc_pmic_exec_mipi_pmic_seq_element()
> with atomisp Image Signal Processing driver on Microsoft Surface 3
> (Cherry Trail).
>
> However, it currently fails with the message I added to the commit
> message below. I wondered why. The driver intel_pmic_chtcrc does define
> the i2c address.
>
> It later turned out that the intel_pmic_bytcrc driver is used on surface3
> instead, where the i2c address is not defined. So, I added the address
> with the patch I'm sending as RFC in this mail. It's working well.
>
> The question is that, should Surface 3 (Cherry Trail) really use the
> intel_pmic_bytcrc driver?
I believe Cherry Trail should use the chtcrc driver.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists