On 4/19/2022 12:53 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
Quoting Satya Priya Kakitapalli (Temp) (2022-04-18 08:08:33)
On 4/15/2022 5:51 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
Quoting Satya Priya (2022-04-14 05:30:14)
Use i2c_new_dummy_device() to register clients along with
the main mfd device.
Why?
As discussed on V9 of this series, I've done these changes.
By using this API we can register other clients at different address
space without having separate DT node.
This avoids calling the probe twice for the same chip, once for each
address space 0x8 and 0x9. I'll add this description in commit text.
Perfect, thanks.
@@ -221,19 +236,38 @@ static int pm8008_probe_irq_peripherals(struct pm8008_data *chip,
static int pm8008_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
{
- int rc;
+ int rc, i;
struct pm8008_data *chip;
+ struct device_node *node = client->dev.of_node;
chip = devm_kzalloc(&client->dev, sizeof(*chip), GFP_KERNEL);
if (!chip)
return -ENOMEM;
chip->dev = &client->dev;
- chip->regmap = devm_regmap_init_i2c(client, &qcom_mfd_regmap_cfg);
- if (!chip->regmap)
- return -ENODEV;
- i2c_set_clientdata(client, chip);
+ for (i = 0; i < PM8008_NUM_CLIENTS; i++) {
This is 2. Why do we have a loop? Just register the i2c client for
pm8008_infra first and then make a dummy for the second address without
the loop and the indentation. Are there going to be more i2c clients?
There wont be more than 2 clients, I can remove the loop, but then we
will have repetitive code.. something like below
Repetitive code can be refactored into a subroutine.
chip->dev = &client->dev;
i2c_set_clientdata(client, chip);
regmap = devm_regmap_init_i2c(client, &qcom_mfd_regmap_cfg[0]);
if (!regmap)
return -ENODEV;
pm8008_client = i2c_new_dummy_device(client->adapter,
client->addr + 1);
if (IS_ERR(pm8008_client)) {
dev_err(&pm8008_client->dev, "can't attach client\n");
return PTR_ERR(pm8008_client);
}
pm8008_client->dev.of_node = of_node_get(client->dev.of_node);
i2c_set_clientdata(pm8008_client, chip);
regulators_regmap = devm_regmap_init_i2c(pm8008_client,
&qcom_mfd_regmap_cfg[1]);
if (!regmap)
return -ENODEV;
diff --git a/include/linux/mfd/qcom_pm8008.h b/include/linux/mfd/qcom_pm8008.h
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..bc64f01
--- /dev/null
+++ b/include/linux/mfd/qcom_pm8008.h
@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
+#ifndef __QCOM_PM8008_H__
+#define __QCOM_PM8008_H__
+
+#define PM8008_INFRA_SID 0
+#define PM8008_REGULATORS_SID 1
+
+#define PM8008_NUM_CLIENTS 2
+
+struct pm8008_data;
+struct regmap *pm8008_get_regmap(struct pm8008_data *chip, u8 sid);
Could this be avoided if the regulator driver used
dev_get_regmap(&pdev->dev.parent, "regulator") to find the regmap named
"regulator" of the parent device, i.e. pm8008-infra.
I gave it a try, it didn't work. I could not get the regmap for
regulators using pm8008-infra i.e., 0x8 device pointer.
Did it not work because the regmap config for the regulator config
didn't have a name?
No I specified the name "regulators" in the regmap_config struct for
regulator config.
