[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <32e9a512-fd74-b2f6-6b8a-fefb9ad5912d@quicinc.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2023 20:52:48 -0700
From: Anjelique Melendez <quic_amelende@...cinc.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
CC: <pavel@....cz>, <lee@...nel.org>, <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
<krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>, <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
<agross@...nel.org>, <andersson@...nel.org>,
<konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>, <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>,
<linux-leds@...r.kernel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] dt-bindings: soc: qcom: Add qcom-pbs bindings
On 7/1/2023 4:03 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 29/06/2023 03:19, Anjelique Melendez wrote:
>
>>>> +examples:
>>>> + - |
>>>> + pmic {
>>>> + #address-cells = <1>;
>>>> + #size-cells = <0>;
>>>> +
>>>> + qcom,pbs@...0 {
>>>> + compatible = "qcom,pbs";
>>>> + reg = <0x7400>;
>>>> + };
>>>
>>> Why do you need a child node for this? Is there more than 1 instance in
>>> a PMIC? Every sub-function of a PMIC doesn't have to have a DT node.
>>>
>>
>> We currently have another downstream driver (which is planned to get upstreamed)
>> which also needs a handle to a pbs device in order to properly trigger events.
>
> I don't see how does it answer Rob's concerns. Neither mine about
> incomplete binding. You don't need pbs node here for that.
>
> Anyway, whatever you have downstream also does not justify any changes.
> Either upstream these so we can see it or drop this binding.
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>
On PMI632, peripherals are partitioned over 2 different SIDs
(https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pmi632.dtsi?h=v6.5-rc1#n42
and https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pmi632.dtsi?h=v6.5-rc1#n149).
Unfortunately, the pbs peripheral and the lpg peripherals are on different
PMI632 devices and therefore have different regmaps.
If we get rid of the pbs node we need to get a handle to the proper regmap.
I see two possible options, we could either introduce a new client property
which points to a peripheral on the same device as pbs.
i.e.
led-controller {
compatible = "qcom,pmi632-lpg";
#address-cells = <1>;
#size-cells = <0>;
#pwm-cells = <2>;
nvmem-names = "lpg_chan_sdam";
nvmem = <&pmi632_sdam7>;
qcom,pbs-phandle = <&pmi632_gpios>;
.....
};
Then when client is probing could do something like the following to get the regmap
dn = of_parse_phandle(node, "qcom,pbs-phandle", 0);
pdev = of_find_device_by_node(dn);
pbs_regmap = dev_get_regmap(&pdev->dev->parent, NULL);
Or we could use the nvmem phandle and just have something like this in client's probe
dn = of_parse_phandle(node, "nvmem", 0);
pdev = of_find_device_by_node(dn);
pbs_regmap = dev_get_regmap(&pdev->dev->parent, NULL);
Let me know what your thoughts are on this.
Thanks,
Anjelique
Powered by blists - more mailing lists