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 linux-arm-msm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html