On Thursday 29 October 2015 20:01:51 Michael Welling wrote: > On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 09:39:05AM +0900, Mark Brown wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 03:23:31PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > > > > However, you have regmap in the driver core already. Mark, is it > > > possible to have regmap API also allow doing raw underlying protocol > > > transfer so that consumers could issue command requests without needing > > > to know if they need to do it over i2c or spi or whatever. Or we need a > > > notion of command registers in regmap... > > > > I don't think it's a good idea to break the encapsulation of the regmap > > and export the raw I/O functionality directly, there seem to be more bad > > ways of using that than good. The driver must at some point know what > > bus it is dealing with and be able to manage this itself. > > > > I don't know what "command registers" are. > > With this device, if the MSB of the first byte of the transaction is 1 then > a convertor command is encoded in that byte instead of a register address. > > So here is my plan: > - Add a function pointer for tsc2005_cmd in the struct tsc2005 > - Put the spi and i2c tsc2005_cmd versions in their respective drivers > - Pass the cmd functions to the core via tsc200x_probe > > Any objections? Sounds good. If you end up needing more than one function pointer, better pass a 'const' pointer to a structure of function pointers that you can declare statically in the driver. > Other review suggestions before I code the revision? > Am I doing too much with a single patch? Yes. Please split out the DT binding changes into a separate patch, and start with one patch that just moves the common parts out of the SPI driver before you add the new driver. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
