linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] arm64: dts: qcom: Add configuration for PMI8950 peripheral

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:   Sat, 5 Nov 2022 00:44:35 +0100
From:   Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@...ainline.org>
To:     Luca Weiss <luca@...tu.xyz>
Cc:     linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        ~postmarketos/upstreaming@...ts.sr.ht, phone-devel@...r.kernel.org,
        AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <kholk11@...il.com>,
        Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...ainline.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] arm64: dts: qcom: Add configuration for PMI8950
 peripheral

On 2022-11-01 17:18:00, Luca Weiss wrote:
> From: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <kholk11@...il.com>
> 
> The PMI8950 features integrated peripherals like ADC, GPIO controller,
> MPPs and others.
> 
> [luca@...tu.xyz: remove pm8950, style changes for 2022 standards, add wled]
> Signed-off-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <kholk11@...il.com>
> Signed-off-by: Luca Weiss <luca@...tu.xyz>
> ---
> Changes since v2:
> * Pick up patch, and adjust as mentioned above sign-offs
> 
>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pmi8950.dtsi | 97 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 97 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pmi8950.dtsi
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pmi8950.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pmi8950.dtsi
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..32d27e2187e3
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pmi8950.dtsi
> @@ -0,0 +1,97 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +// Copyright (c) 2019, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <kholk11@...il.com>
> +
> +#include <dt-bindings/iio/qcom,spmi-vadc.h>
> +#include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/irq.h>
> +#include <dt-bindings/spmi/spmi.h>
> +
> +&spmi_bus {
> +	pmic@2 {
> +		compatible = "qcom,pmi8950", "qcom,spmi-pmic";
> +		reg = <0x2 SPMI_USID>;
> +		#address-cells = <1>;
> +		#size-cells = <0>;
> +
> +		pmi8950_vadc: adc@...0 {
> +			compatible = "qcom,spmi-vadc";
> +			reg = <0x3100>;
> +			interrupts = <0x2 0x31 0x0 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;
> +			#address-cells = <1>;
> +			#size-cells = <0>;
> +			#io-channel-cells = <1>;
> +
> +			adc-chan@0 {
> +				reg = <VADC_USBIN>;
> +				qcom,pre-scaling = <1 4>;
> +				label = "usbin";

I've previously sent a patch with labels in the node name instead [1],
what's the preferred way nowadays?

[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20220926190148.283805-4-marijn.suijten@somainline.org/

> +			};
> +
> +			adc-chan@1 {
> +				reg = <VADC_DCIN>;
> +				qcom,pre-scaling = <1 4>;
> +				label = "dcin";
> +			};
> +
> +			adc-chan@2 {
> +				reg = <VADC_VCHG_SNS>;
> +				qcom,pre-scaling = <1 1>;
> +				label = "vchg_sns";

Shall we use hyphens in labels (especially if using them as node names).

> +			};
> +
> +			adc-chan@9 {
> +				reg = <VADC_REF_625MV>;
> +				qcom,pre-scaling = <1 1>;
> +				label = "ref_625mv";
> +			};
> +
> +			adc-chan@a {
> +				reg = <VADC_REF_1250MV>;
> +				qcom,pre-scaling = <1 1>;
> +				label = "ref_1250v";

mv* :)

> +			};
> +
> +			adc-chan@d {
> +				reg = <VADC_SPARE2>;
> +				qcom,pre-scaling = <1 1>;
> +				label = "chg_temp";
> +			};
> +		};
> +
> +		pmi8950_mpps: mpps@...0 {
> +			compatible = "qcom,pmi8950-mpp", "qcom,spmi-mpp";
> +			reg = <0xa000>;
> +			gpio-controller;
> +			gpio-ranges = <&pmi8950_mpps 0 0 4>;
> +			#gpio-cells = <2>;
> +			interrupt-controller;
> +			#interrupt-cells = <2>;
> +		};
> +
> +		pmi8950_gpio: gpio@...0 {

It seems more common to name this label plural pmi8950_gpioS?

> +			compatible = "qcom,pmi8950-gpio", "qcom,spmi-gpio";
> +			reg = <0xc000>;
> +			gpio-controller;
> +			gpio-ranges = <&pmi8950_gpio 0 0 2>;
> +			#gpio-cells = <2>;
> +			interrupt-controller;
> +			#interrupt-cells = <2>;
> +		};
> +	};
> +
> +	pmic@3 {
> +		compatible = "qcom,pmi8950", "qcom,spmi-pmic";
> +		reg = <0x3 SPMI_USID>;
> +		#address-cells = <1>;
> +		#size-cells = <0>;
> +
> +		pmi8950_wled: leds@...0 {
> +			compatible = "qcom,pmi8950-wled";
> +			reg = <0xd800>, <0xd900>;
> +			interrupts = <0x3 0xd8 0x02 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;
> +			interrupt-names = "short";
> +			label = "backlight";

Same question here about using the node name instead, and dropping the
label altogether.

- Marijn

> +
> +			status = "disabled";
> +		};
> +	};
> +};
> -- 
> 2.38.1
>