On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 12:06:03PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Apr 2014, Matt Porter wrote:
>
> > BCM590xx utilizes a second i2c slave address to access additional
>
> s/i2c/I2C
>
> > register space. Add support for the second address space by
> > instantiated a dummy i2c device with the appropriate secondary
>
> s/instantiated/instantiating
>
> > i2c slave address. Expose a second regmap register space so that
>
> s/i2c/I2C
>
> Exposing?
>
> s/regmap/Regmap
>
> > mfd drivers can access this secondary i2c slave address space.
>
> s/mfd/MFD
>
> s/i2c/I2C
Ok, I'll fix the capitalization and wording..except for regmap as
noted by Mark.
>
> > Signed-off-by: Matt Porter <mporter@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/mfd/bcm590xx.c | 60 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
> > include/linux/mfd/bcm590xx.h | 9 ++++---
> > 2 files changed, 52 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/mfd/bcm590xx.c b/drivers/mfd/bcm590xx.c
> > index e9a33c7..b710ffa 100644
> > --- a/drivers/mfd/bcm590xx.c
> > +++ b/drivers/mfd/bcm590xx.c
> > @@ -28,39 +28,71 @@ static const struct mfd_cell bcm590xx_devs[] = {
> > },
> > };
> >
> > -static const struct regmap_config bcm590xx_regmap_config = {
> > +static const struct regmap_config bcm590xx_regmap_config_0 = {
>
> Not loving _0 and _1 appendages.
>
> Is one of them {primary|master} and the other {secondary|slave}?
I guess from a Linux I2C subsystem, we can view _1 as the
"secondary"...it does correspond the the i2c_new_dummy() device
that we create in the mfd probe. That device corresponds to the
ADDMAP=1 address on the PMU. This is why I used those appendages.
-Matt
--
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
