On Wed, 2014-11-05 at 10:11 -0800, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 5:33 AM, Ivan T. Ivanov <iivanov@xxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> [..]
> > @@ -28,11 +144,27 @@ static int pmic_spmi_probe(struct spmi_device
> > *sdev)
> > {
> > struct device_node *root = sdev->dev.of_node;
> > struct regmap *regmap;
> > + struct property *prop;
> > + int major, minor, ret;
> > + char *name, compatible[32];
> >
> > regmap = devm_regmap_init_spmi_ext(sdev,
> > &spmi_regmap_config);
> > if (IS_ERR(regmap))
> > return PTR_ERR(regmap);
> >
> > + ret = pmic_spmi_read_revid(regmap, &name, &major, &minor);
> > + if (!ret) {
> > + snprintf(compatible, ARRAY_SIZE(compatible),
> > "qcom,%s-v%d.%d",
> > + name, major, minor);
> > + prop = kzalloc(sizeof(*prop), GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (prop) {
> > + prop->name = kstrdup("compatible",
> > GFP_KERNEL);
> > + prop->value = kstrdup(compatible,
> > GFP_KERNEL);
> > + prop->length = strlen(prop->value);
> > + of_update_property(root, prop);
> > + }
> > + }
> > +
>
> Why would you do this?
> What benefit does it give to patch the of_node to have a more
> specific
> compatible?
Some of the child device drivers have to know PMIC chip revision.
Regards,
Ivan
--
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
