[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aa8f232f-701a-5b4c-eda8-89fc0e6fe5a8@collabora.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2023 11:01:32 +0200
From: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
<angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>
To: Chen-Yu Tsai <wenst@...omium.org>, Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: Zhiyong Tao <zhiyong.tao@...iatek.com>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/9] mfd: mt6397: Split MediaTek MT6366 PMIC out of MT6358
Il 03/08/23 09:42, Chen-Yu Tsai ha scritto:
> The MT6366 PMIC is mostly, but not fully, compatible with MT6358. It has
> a different set of regulators. Specifically, it lacks the camera related
> VCAM* LDOs, but has additional VM18, VMDDR, and VSRAM_CORE LDOs.
>
> Add a separate compatible for the MT6366 PMIC. The regulator cell for
> this new entry uses a new compatible string matching MT6366.
>
> Fixes: c47383f84909 ("mfd: Add support for the MediaTek MT6366 PMIC")
> Signed-off-by: Chen-Yu Tsai <wenst@...omium.org>
I agree in that the LDOs are a bit different, but that's handled by the
mt6358-regulator driver regardless of the actual devicetree compatible,
as that's selected through a chip_id check.
Finally, looking at the driver implementation itself, the addition of a
specific mt6366 compatible here seems redundant, because the actual HW is
- Handled by drivers, but
- Described by bindings
Any other opinions on this?
Regards,
Angelo
> ---
> drivers/mfd/mt6397-core.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/mt6397-core.c b/drivers/mfd/mt6397-core.c
> index f6c1f80f94a4..3f8dfe60a59b 100644
> --- a/drivers/mfd/mt6397-core.c
> +++ b/drivers/mfd/mt6397-core.c
> @@ -206,6 +206,26 @@ static const struct mfd_cell mt6359_devs[] = {
> },
> };
>
> +static const struct mfd_cell mt6366_devs[] = {
> + {
> + .name = "mt6358-regulator",
> + .of_compatible = "mediatek,mt6366-regulator"
> + }, {
> + .name = "mt6358-rtc",
> + .num_resources = ARRAY_SIZE(mt6358_rtc_resources),
> + .resources = mt6358_rtc_resources,
> + .of_compatible = "mediatek,mt6358-rtc",
> + }, {
> + .name = "mt6358-sound",
> + .of_compatible = "mediatek,mt6358-sound"
> + }, {
> + .name = "mt6358-keys",
> + .num_resources = ARRAY_SIZE(mt6358_keys_resources),
> + .resources = mt6358_keys_resources,
> + .of_compatible = "mediatek,mt6358-keys"
> + },
> +};
> +
> static const struct mfd_cell mt6397_devs[] = {
> {
> .name = "mt6397-rtc",
> @@ -280,6 +300,14 @@ static const struct chip_data mt6359_core = {
> .irq_init = mt6358_irq_init,
> };
>
> +static const struct chip_data mt6366_core = {
> + .cid_addr = MT6358_SWCID,
> + .cid_shift = 8,
> + .cells = mt6366_devs,
> + .cell_size = ARRAY_SIZE(mt6366_devs),
> + .irq_init = mt6358_irq_init,
> +};
> +
> static const struct chip_data mt6397_core = {
> .cid_addr = MT6397_CID,
> .cid_shift = 0,
> @@ -358,6 +386,9 @@ static const struct of_device_id mt6397_of_match[] = {
> }, {
> .compatible = "mediatek,mt6359",
> .data = &mt6359_core,
> + }, {
> + .compatible = "mediatek,mt6366",
> + .data = &mt6366_core,
> }, {
> .compatible = "mediatek,mt6397",
> .data = &mt6397_core,
Powered by blists - more mailing lists