On Fri, 04 Nov 2022, jerome Neanne wrote: > > > On 31/10/2022 12:00, Lee Jones wrote: > > > diff --git a/include/linux/mfd/tps65219.h b/include/linux/mfd/tps65219.h > > > new file mode 100644 > > > index 000000000000..2c1cf92e92ac > > > --- /dev/null > > > +++ b/include/linux/mfd/tps65219.h > > > > +/** > > > + * struct tps65219 - tps65219 sub-driver chip access routines > > > + * > > > + * Device data may be used to access the TPS65219 chip > > > + * > > > + * @dev MFD device > > > + * @regmap Regmap for accessing the device registers > > > + * @irq_data Regmap irq data used for the irq chip > > > + * @nb notifier block for the restart handler > > > + */ > > > > This header needs work. > I'm not sure to get your point here. Just something like below to match > format or do you expect more: > > /** > * struct tps65219 - tps65219 sub-driver chip access routines > * > * Device data may be used to access the TPS65219 chip > * > * @dev: MFD device > * @regmap: Regmap for accessing the device registers > * @irq_data: Regmap irq data used for the irq chip > * @nb: notifier block for the restart handler > */ > > > > > Can you try an compile with W=1 please. > This raise one warning on mfd: Is that before or after the header was fixed-up? > drivers/mfd/tps65219.c:28:12: warning: ‘tps65219_soft_shutdown’ defined but > not used [-Wunused-function] > 28 | static int tps65219_soft_shutdown(struct tps65219 *tps) > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > soft_shutdown has been validated and is used in TI baseline even if not > hooked in upstream version further to this review: > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220825150224.826258-5-msp@xxxxxxxxxxxx/ Will tps65219_soft_shutdown() be used? I think it should be removed until it's utilised in Mainline. > It was a TI requirement to implement it... > Let me know if you want me to remove this function or if we can keep it like > this. > -- Lee Jones [李琼斯]
