Hi Krzysztof,
On 10/31/2024 1:06 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 31, 2024 at 12:28:50AM +0530, Jishnu Prakash wrote:
>> PMIC5 Gen3 has a similar ADC architecture to that on PMIC5 Gen2,
>> with all SW communication to ADC going through PMK8550 which
>> communicates with other PMICs through PBS. The major difference is
>> that the register interface used here is that of an SDAM present on
>> PMK8550, rather than a dedicated ADC peripheral. There may be more than one
>> SDAM used for ADC5 Gen3. Each ADC SDAM has eight channels, each of which may
>> be used for either immediate reads (same functionality as previous PMIC5 and
>> PMIC5 Gen2 ADC peripherals) or recurring measurements (same as PMIC5 and PMIC5
>> Gen2 ADC_TM functionality). In this case, we have VADC and ADC_TM functionality
>> combined into the same driver.
>>
>> Patch 1 is a cleanup, to move the QCOM ADC dt-bindings files from
>> dt-bindings/iio to dt-bindings/iio/adc folder, as they are
>> specifically for ADC devices. It also fixes all compilation errors
>> with this change in driver and devicetree files and similar errors
>> in documentation for dtbinding check.
>>
>> Patch 2 adds bindings for ADC5 Gen3 peripheral.
>>
>> Patch 3 adds the main driver for ADC5 Gen3.
>>
>> Patch 4 adds the auxiliary thermal driver which supports the ADC_TM
>> functionality of ADC5 Gen3.
>>
>> Changes since v3:
>> - Updated files affected by adc file path change in /arch/arm folder,
>> which were missed earlier.
>
> I don't think this was tested afterwards...
If you are referring to the error found by the bot in my V4 patches 1 and 2, I think the error is invalid.
In both cases, this is the error:
fatal error: dt-bindings/iio/adc/qcom,spmi-vadc.h: No such file or directory
But this file is added in patch 1, through a renaming:
rename include/dt-bindings/iio/{ => adc}/qcom,spmi-vadc.h (100%)
I have replied to Rob on the patch 1 mail pointing this out, but I did not get any reply yet.
I have also tried updating dtschema and running 'make dt_binding_check' again myself and I did not get this error.
If this was some rare error on the bot's side, which may not always happen, I'm thinking of pushing the same patch
again in the next patch series, as I think there is nothing to fix from my side. Please let me know if you have any other suggestions.
Thanks,
Jishnu
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>
