Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: qcom: pm7250b: make SID configurable

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, 10 May 2023 at 11:34, Luca Weiss <luca.weiss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Wed May 10, 2023 at 10:07 AM CEST, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> > On Wed, 10 May 2023 at 09:55, Krzysztof Kozlowski
> > <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 10/05/2023 08:47, Luca Weiss wrote:
> > > > Hi Krzysztof,
> > > >
> > > > On Fri Apr 7, 2023 at 10:27 AM CEST, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > >> On 07/04/2023 09:45, Luca Weiss wrote:
> > > >>> Like other Qualcomm PMICs the PM7250B can be used on different addresses
> > > >>> on the SPMI bus. Use similar defines like the PMK8350 to make this
> > > >>> possible.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Signed-off-by: Luca Weiss <luca.weiss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >>> ---
> > > >>>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm7250b.dtsi | 23 ++++++++++++++++-------
> > > >>>  1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> > > >>>
> > > >>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm7250b.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm7250b.dtsi
> > > >>> index daa6f1d30efa..eeb476edc79a 100644
> > > >>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm7250b.dtsi
> > > >>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm7250b.dtsi
> > > >>> @@ -7,6 +7,15 @@
> > > >>>  #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/irq.h>
> > > >>>  #include <dt-bindings/spmi/spmi.h>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> +/* This PMIC can be configured to be at different SIDs */
> > > >>> +#ifndef PM7250B_SID
> > > >>> +   #define PM7250B_SID 2
> > > >>
> > > >> Drop indentation, although anyway I am against this. Please don't bring
> > > >> new patterns of this at least till we settle previous discussion.
> > > >>
> > > >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/46658cbb-fff5-e98b-fdad-88fa683a9c75@xxxxxxxxxx/
> > > >
> > > > What's the outcome of the discussion? For this PMIC it's totally enough
> > > > to have the SID configurable like in this patch, I don't think this PMIC
> > > > will be included twice in a board - at least I'm not aware of such a
> > > > configuration.
> > >
> > > We did not reach consensus and I still disagree with complex macros or
> > > macros depending on order of inclusion.
> >
> > I still think we should find a way to parametrise PMIC dtsi, however I
> > agree with Krzysztof that complex CPP is not a way to go.
>
> What about the macro already used in-tree and proposed with this patch?
> I wouldn't say this is a "complex macro" since it's just a single number
> being replaced in a few places.

My 2c: in my opinion it is fine (and it follows parameterization that
we already have for some PMICs).

> Could we get this in now, and if we find a new & better way in the
> future we can adjust all the dtsi upstream?

And this depends on the decision of RobH and Krzysztof.

-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry



[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [Linux for Sparc]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux