On 12/6/2021 7:17 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
On Mon, Dec 06, 2021 at 07:13:02PM +0530, Satya Priya Kakitapalli (Temp) wrote:
On 11/25/2021 8:54 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 03:12:29PM +0530, Satya Priya wrote:
+properties:
+ compatible:
+ const: qcom,pm8008-regulators
Why are we adding a separate compatible for this when we already know
that this is a pm8008 based on the parent?
For the regulator driver to be probed we do need a separate compatible
right? may be I didn't get your question..
My understanding is we should have a separate compatible for each peripheral
under the parent mfd node.. like gpios, temp alarm, regulators etc..
No, the MFD can register whatever children it likes without needing any
help from the DT.
I think this is possible by using of_platform_bus_probe() API. But, the
mfd driver uses of_platform_populate() API, this needs all device nodes
to have a 'compatible' property unlike the of_platform_bus_probe() API.
All other MFD upstream drivers are also using the same API and
registering the child regulators by using separate compatible strings.
+ vdd_l1_l2-supply:
+ description: Input supply phandle of ldo1 and ldo2 regulators.
These supply nodes should be chip level, they're going into the chip and
in general the expectation is that you should be able to describe the
supplies going into a device without worrying about how or if any
particular OS splits things up.
So, if i understand correctly, we don't have to mention these in the
documentation as these are handled at framework level?
No. I'm saying you should document these at the chip level, they do
need to be documented though.
By chip level do you mean "pm8008.yaml" documentation? If so, yes, I can
move these to pm8008.yaml and change DT accordingly.
