linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] mfd: tps65215: Add support for TI TPS65215 PMIC

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: <1e23f5d3-4af1-47d3-a977-ab25dde7e1ec@ti.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2025 16:13:07 -0600
From: Shree Ramamoorthy <s-ramamoorthy@...com>
To: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>, <aaro.koskinen@....fi>,
        <andreas@...nade.info>, <khilman@...libre.com>, <rogerq@...nel.org>,
        <tony@...mide.com>, <lee@...nel.org>, <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC: <m-leonard@...com>, <praneeth@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] mfd: tps65215: Add support for TI TPS65215 PMIC

Hi,

On 1/4/2025 5:30 AM, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
> Le 03/01/2025 à 23:57, Shree Ramamoorthy a écrit :
>> Use chip ID and chip_data struct to differentiate between devices in
>> probe(). Add TPS65215 resource information. Update descriptions and
>> copyright information to reflect the driver supports 2 PMIC devices.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Shree Ramamoorthy <s-ramamoorthy@...com>
>
> ...
>
>> @@ -218,10 +333,29 @@ static const struct regmap_irq_chip
>> tps65219_irq_chip = {
>>       .sub_reg_offsets = tps65219_sub_irq_offsets,
>>   };
>>   +struct tps65219_chip_data {
>
> Maybe tps6521x_chip_data?
> (and if so, same for gpio-tps65219.c)
>
I tried to keep tps65219 as the main prefix where possible to avoid the confusion
that the function applies to all devices starting with TPS6521X, when this
driver doesn't. I will revert any functions that start with tps6521x to avoid that
confusion as well.

>> +    const struct regmap_irq_chip *irq_chip;
>> +    const struct mfd_cell *cells;
>> +    int n_cells;
>> +};
>> +
>> +static struct tps65219_chip_data chip_info_table[] = {
>> +    [TPS65215] = {
>> +        .irq_chip = &tps65215_irq_chip,
>> +        .cells = tps65215_cells,
>> +        .n_cells = ARRAY_SIZE(tps65215_cells),
>> +    },
>> +    [TPS65219] = {
>> +        .irq_chip = &tps65219_irq_chip,
>> +        .cells = tps65219_cells,
>> +        .n_cells = ARRAY_SIZE(tps65219_cells),
>> +    },
>> +};
>
> ...
>
>> @@ -291,7 +427,10 @@ static int tps65219_probe(struct i2c_client
>> *client)
>>   }
>>     static const struct of_device_id of_tps65219_match_table[] = {
>> -    { .compatible = "ti,tps65219", },
>> +    { .compatible = "ti,tps65215", .data = (void *)TPS65215, },
>> +    { .compatible = "ti,tps65219", .data = (void *)TPS65219, },
>> +    { .compatible = "ti,tps65219", .data = (void *)TPS65219, },
>> +    { .compatible = "ti,tps65215", .data = (void *)TPS65215, },
>>       {}
>
> Entries look duplicated.
>
Thanks for catching this. I have applied this feedback!

>>   };
>
> ...
>
> CJ
>