> -----Original Message-----
> From: Guenter Roeck <groeck7@xxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Guenter Roeck
> Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2020 6:04 PM
> To: Vadim Pasternak <vadimp@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx;
> vijaykhemka@xxxxxx
> Cc: linux-hwmon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH hwmon-next v1 5/5] hwmon: (pmbus/tps53679) Extend
> device list supported by driver
>
> On 1/5/20 2:58 AM, Vadim Pasternak wrote:
> > Extends driver with support of the additional devices:
> > Texas Instruments Dual channel DCAP+ multiphase controllers: TPS53688,
> > SN1906016.
> > Infineon Multi-phase Digital VR Controller Sierra devices XDPE12286C,
> > XDPE12284C, XDPE12283C, XDPE12254C and XDPE12250C.
> >
> > Extend Kconfig with added devices.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Vadim Pasternak <vadimp@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/hwmon/pmbus/Kconfig | 5 +++--
> > drivers/hwmon/pmbus/tps53679.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
> > 2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/Kconfig b/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/Kconfig
> > index 59859979571d..9e3d197d5322 100644
> > --- a/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/Kconfig
> > +++ b/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/Kconfig
> > @@ -200,10 +200,11 @@ config SENSORS_TPS40422
> > be called tps40422.
> >
> > config SENSORS_TPS53679
> > - tristate "TI TPS53679"
> > + tristate "TI TPS53679, TPS53688, SN1906016, Infineon XDPE122xxx
> family"
> > help
> > If you say yes here you get hardware monitoring support for TI
> > - TPS53679.
> > + TPS53679, PS53688, SN1906016 and Infineon XDPE12286C,
> XDPE12284C,
>
> TPS53688. For the others, for some I can't even determine if they exist in the
> first place (eg SN1906016, XPDE12250C) or how they would differ from other
> variants (eg XPDE12284C vs. XPDE12284A).
> And why would they all use the same bit map in the VOUT_MODE register, the
> same number of PMBus pages (phases), and the same attributes in each page ?
Hi Guenter,
Thank you for reply.
On our new system we have device XPDE12284C equipped.
I tested this device.
Infineon datasheet refers all these device as XDPE122xxC
family and it doesn't specify any differences in register map
between these devices.
Tomorrow we'll have guys from Infineon in our lab and I'll
verify if there is any difference.
If yes, I'll leave only XPDE12284C.
>
> Thanks,
> Guenter
>
> > + XDPE12283C, XDPE12254C, XDPE12250C devices.
> >
> > This driver can also be built as a module. If so, the module will
> > be called tps53679.
> > diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/tps53679.c
> > b/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/tps53679.c index 7ce2fca4acde..f38eb116735b
> > 100644
> > --- a/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/tps53679.c
> > +++ b/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/tps53679.c
> > @@ -89,6 +89,13 @@ static int tps53679_probe(struct i2c_client
> > *client,
> >
> > static const struct i2c_device_id tps53679_id[] = {
> > {"tps53679", 0},
> > + {"tps53688", 0},
> > + {"sn1906016", 0},
> > + {"xdpe12283c", 0},
> > + {"xdpe12250c", 0},
> > + {"xdpe12254c", 0},
> > + {"xdpe12284c", 0},
> > + {"xdpe12286c", 0},
>
> Alphabetic order, please.
>
> > {}
> > };
> >
> > @@ -96,6 +103,13 @@ MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(i2c, tps53679_id);
> >
> > static const struct of_device_id __maybe_unused tps53679_of_match[] = {
> > {.compatible = "ti,tps53679"},
> > + {.compatible = "ti,tps53688"},
> > + {.compatible = "ti,sn1906016"},
> > + {.compatible = "infineon,xdpe12283c"},
> > + {.compatible = "infineon,xdpe12250c"},
> > + {.compatible = "infineon,xdpe12254c"},
> > + {.compatible = "infineon,xdpe12284c"},
> > + {.compatible = "infineon,xdpe12286c"},
> > {}
> > };
> > MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, tps53679_of_match);
> >
