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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <20230807061338.GA30158@linuxcarl2.richtek.com>
Date:   Mon, 7 Aug 2023 14:13:38 +0800
From:   Alina Yu <alina_yu@...htek.com>
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
CC:     ChiYuan Huang <cy_huang@...htek.com>, <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>,
        <alina_yu@...htek.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: rtq2208: Add Richtek
 RTQ2208 SubPMIC

Hi
Krzysztof,

On Sat, Aug 05, 2023 at 11:27:00PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> 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.
>

Thank you for your kind advice.
I will keep regulator node in v7

Best regards,
Alina