[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2a1ae708-3718-4f70-9837-bcc50b7c8f66@roeck-us.net>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2024 06:31:40 -0700
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To: Farouk Bouabid <farouk.bouabid@...rry.de>,
Quentin Schulz <quentin.schulz@...rry.de>, Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.com>,
Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley
<conor+dt@...nel.org>, Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>,
Peter Rosin <peda@...ntia.se>, Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>
Cc: linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/9] Add Mule MFD support
On 6/19/24 00:45, Farouk Bouabid wrote:
>>
>> If it is properly defined in devicetree, the emulated AMC6821 should be
>> an i2c device, possibly sitting behind an i2c multiplexer, not a
>> platform device.
>
>
> The emulated AMC6821 and the Mule I2C mux are both reachable using I2C address (0x18), and hence the use of MFD as the mux only uses one I2C register that is not used by AMC6821.
>
Whatever you do, the amc chip is still an i2c driver and needs to remain one.
Modeling it as platform driver is simply wrong, and I won't accept those patches.
Guenter
Powered by blists - more mailing lists