[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c9485ea6-e419-947e-4d5e-bcaf5d0cfeb2@linaro.org>
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2023 11:38:45 +0100
From: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>
To: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
Cc: Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/14] arm64: dts: qcom: sa8775p: add support for the
on-board PMICs
On 20.03.2023 11:24, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 9:22 PM Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 14.03.2023 19:30, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
>>> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>
>>>
>>> Add a new .dtsi file for sa8775p PMICs and add the four PMICs interfaced
>>> to the SoC via SPMI.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>
>>> ---
>>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sa8775p-pmics.dtsi | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++
>>> 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+)
>>> create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sa8775p-pmics.dtsi
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sa8775p-pmics.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sa8775p-pmics.dtsi
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 000000000000..77e2515a7ab9
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sa8775p-pmics.dtsi
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,37 @@
>>> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-3-Clause
>>> +/*
>>> + * Copyright (c) 2023, Linaro Limited
>>> + */
>>> +
>>> +#include <dt-bindings/input/input.h>
>>> +#include <dt-bindings/spmi/spmi.h>
>>> +
>>> +&spmi_bus {
>>> + pmk8775_0: pmic@0 {
>> pmk8775..
>>
>>> + compatible = "qcom,pmm8654au", "qcom,spmi-pmic";
>> ..or pmm8654au?
>>
>
> Honestly, I got inspired by this bit from sc8280xp-pmics.dtsi:
>
> 54 &spmi_bus {
> 55 pmk8280: pmic@0 {
> 56 compatible = "qcom,pmk8350", "qcom,spmi-pmic";
> 57 reg = <0x0 SPMI_USID>;
> 58 #address-cells = <1>;
> 59 #size-cells = <0>;
>
> Where the label seems to follow the SoC's numbering. Do you think it
> would be better to consistently use the pmic's name?
Generally, the automotive PMICs seem to be carbon copies of their non-AU
relatives, except they're built to a better electrical spec (because well..
they're gonna be used in cars) or very very slightly modified, so I propose:
actual_pmic: pmic@sid {
compatbile = "qcom,actualpmic", "qcom,pmic-its-based-on";
}
Konrad
>
> Bartosz
>
>> Konrad
>>> + reg = <0x0 SPMI_USID>;
>>> + #address-cells = <1>;
>>> + #size-cells = <0>;
>>> + };
>>> +
>>> + pmk8775_1: pmic@2 {
>>> + compatible = "qcom,pmm8654au", "qcom,spmi-pmic";
>>> + reg = <0x2 SPMI_USID>;
>>> + #address-cells = <1>;
>>> + #size-cells = <0>;
>>> + };
>>> +
>>> + pmk8775_2: pmic@4 {
>>> + compatible = "qcom,pmm8654au", "qcom,spmi-pmic";
>>> + reg = <0x4 SPMI_USID>;
>>> + #address-cells = <1>;
>>> + #size-cells = <0>;
>>> + };
>>> +
>>> + pmk8775_3: pmic@6 {
>>> + compatible = "qcom,pmm8654au", "qcom,spmi-pmic";
>>> + reg = <0x6 SPMI_USID>;
>>> + #address-cells = <1>;
>>> + #size-cells = <0>;
>>> + };
>>> +};
Powered by blists - more mailing lists