On 08/15/2017 11:09 AM, sean.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
From: Sean Wang <sean.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Add MediaTek MT6380 regulator becoming one of PMIC wrapper slave
and also add extra new regmap_config of 32-bit mode for MT6380
since old regmap_config of 16-bit mode can't be fit into the need.
Signed-off-by: Chenglin Xu <chenglin.xu@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Chen Zhong <chen.zhong@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Sean Wang <sean.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c | 25 ++++++++++++++++++++++---
1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c
index 1f8b69a..047e3d9 100644
--- a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c
+++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c
@@ -501,6 +501,7 @@ struct pmic_wrapper;
struct pwrap_slv_type {
const u32 *dew_regs;
enum pmic_type type;
+ const struct regmap_config *regmap;
/* pwrap operations are highly associated with the PMIC types,
* so the pointers added increases flexibility allowing determination
* which type is used by the detection through device tree.
@@ -1109,7 +1110,7 @@ static irqreturn_t pwrap_interrupt(int irqno, void *dev_id)
return IRQ_HANDLED;
}
-static const struct regmap_config pwrap_regmap_config = {
+static const struct regmap_config pwrap_regmap_config16 = {
.reg_bits = 16,
.val_bits = 16,
.reg_stride = 2,
@@ -1118,9 +1119,19 @@ static const struct regmap_config pwrap_regmap_config = {
.max_register = 0xffff,
};
+static const struct regmap_config pwrap_regmap_config32 = {
+ .reg_bits = 32,
+ .val_bits = 32,
+ .reg_stride = 4,
+ .reg_read = pwrap_regmap_read,
+ .reg_write = pwrap_regmap_write,
+ .max_register = 0xffff,
+};
+
static const struct pwrap_slv_type pmic_mt6323 = {
.dew_regs = mt6323_regs,
.type = PMIC_MT6323,
+ .regmap = &pwrap_regmap_config16,
.pwrap_read = pwrap_read16,
.pwrap_write = pwrap_write16,
};
@@ -1128,6 +1139,7 @@ static const struct pwrap_slv_type pmic_mt6323 = {
static const struct pwrap_slv_type pmic_mt6380 = {
.dew_regs = NULL,
.type = PMIC_MT6380,
+ .regmap = &pwrap_regmap_config32,
.pwrap_read = pwrap_read32,
.pwrap_write = pwrap_write32,
};
@@ -1135,6 +1147,7 @@ static const struct pwrap_slv_type pmic_mt6380 = {
static const struct pwrap_slv_type pmic_mt6397 = {
.dew_regs = mt6397_regs,
.type = PMIC_MT6397,
+ .regmap = &pwrap_regmap_config16,
.pwrap_read = pwrap_read16,
.pwrap_write = pwrap_write16,
};
@@ -1144,9 +1157,15 @@ static const struct of_device_id of_slave_match_tbl[] = {
.compatible = "mediatek,mt6323",
.data = &pmic_mt6323,
}, {
+ /* The MT6380 slave device is directly pointed to the regulator
+ * device which is different from the cases MT6323 and MT6397
+ * where they're one kind of MFDs.
+ */
+ .compatible = "mediatek,mt6380-regulator",
+ .data = &pmic_mt6380,
I understand that mt6380 only provides a regulator and no other function other
PMICs provide, right?
Then maybe write a comment like:
The MT6380 PMIC only implements a regulator, so we bind it directly instead of
using a MFD. If so, we should state that in the pwrap bindings document, I think.
Regards,
Matthias
--
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
