On Sun, Oct 08, 2023 at 12:40:29PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 08/10/2023 03:20, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 07, 2023 at 10:28:02PM +0530, Saravanan Sekar wrote:
> >> Document mpq2286 power-management IC. Instead of simple 'buck', 'buck0' is
> >> used to keep the driver common which handles multiple regulators.
> >
> > Sorry for the maybe dumb question, but where can I find the driver
> > depencency on buck naming ?
>
> I guess it is because:
> PMBUS_REGULATOR_STEP("buck", 0, MPQ7932_N_VOLTAGES,
> creates regulator name as buck+id (so buck0).
>
Ah, good point. Problem here is that this is already kind of common,
even though the use of "buckX" isn't. Look for "vout0", or
'PMBUS_REGULATOR("vout", 0)'. Apparently so far no one took offence
if a regulator was named "vout0" even if "vout1" didn't exist.
I don't really have a good solution right now, but I guess we'll need
a second set of macros for the single-regulator case, or maybe generate
struct regulator_desc arrays using a function. I'll have to explore
options.
Please let me know how you want the subsystem to handle existing
single-channel regulators with numbered regulator name.
Saravanan - for this driver please just declare a local driver-specific
variant of the PMBUS_REGULATOR_STEP() macro which doesn't use indexing,
use it to initialise a second regulators_desc array, and use that second
array for mpq2286. That is a bit messy, but acceptable for now until
there is a more generic solution (unless of course you have an idea for
one and want to implement it, but that is not a requirement).
Thanks,
Guenter
