linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: rtq2208: Add Richtek RTQ2208 SubPMIC

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <822f63ef-d9e6-84f2-1a98-8a916ffaeb58@linaro.org>
Date:   Sat, 5 Aug 2023 23:27:00 +0200
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     ChiYuan Huang <cy_huang@...htek.com>,
        Alina Yu <alina_yu@...htek.com>
Cc:     lgirdwood@...il.com, broonie@...nel.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, conor+dt@...nel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: rtq2208: Add Richtek
 RTQ2208 SubPMIC

On 03/08/2023 08:36, ChiYuan Huang wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 03:13:11PM +0800, Alina Yu wrote:
>> Add bindings for Richtek RTQ2208 IC controlled SubPMIC
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Alina Yu <alina_yu@...htek.com>


>> +    
>> +  richtek,mtp-sel-high:
>> +    type: boolean
>> +    description:
>> +      vout register selection based on this boolean value.
>> +      false - Using DVS0 register setting to adjust vout
>> +      true - Using DVS1 register setting to adjust vout
>> +
>> +  regulators:
>> +    type: object
> Just curious.
> It seems this PMIC only support buck/ldo ouput.
> Since Krzysztof already reviewed it, not sure whether to group it into one node is common or not.
> AFAIK, if there's no more function included, to put all on the top level may be better.
>> +

Indeed we tend to avoid empty nodes just as a corresponding part to
Linux device.

Here, I don't know Rob's and Conor's opinion, but for cases of having
more than 2 regulators, having "regulators" node makes sense to me -
nicely organizes that piece of DT which can grow quite big. I can also
live without the "regulators" node.

Best regards,
Krzysztof