Hi,
On Friday 06 of December 2013 12:32:14 Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> Add document describing device tree bindings for MAX14577 MFD driver.
>
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/max14577.txt | 65 ++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 65 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/max14577.txt
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/max14577.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/max14577.txt
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..0b2449aaf8bf
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/max14577.txt
> @@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
> +Maxim MAX14577 Multi-Function Device
> +
> +MAX14577 is a Multi-Function Device with Micro-USB Interface Circuit, Li+
> +Battery Charger and SFOUT LDO output for powering USB devices. It is
> +interfaced to host controller using I2C.
> +
> +
> +Required properties:
> +- compatible : Must be "maxim,max14577".
> +- reg : I2C slave address for the max14577 chip.
If this chip has a predefined set of addresses it might be a good idea to
list them here.
> +- interrupts : IRQ line for the max14577 chip.
> +- interrupt-parent : The parent interrupt controller.
> +
> +
> +Optional nodes:
> +- max14577-muic :
> + Node used only by extcon consumers.
Do you need a dedicated node to do this? If you don't need any additional
data for MUIC cell, why couldn't the parent node be used to register the
extcon provider?
> + Required properties:
> + - compatible : "maxim,max14577-muic"
> +
> +- regulators :
> + Required properties:
> + - compatible : "maxim,max14577-regulator"
> +
> + May contain a sub-node per regulator from the list below. Each
Is "May" the correct word? Wouldn't it be better to always have
configuration specified for all regulators of the cell?
> + sub-node should contain the constraints and initialization information
> + for that regulator. See regulator.txt for a description of standard
> + properties for these sub-nodes.
> +
> + List of valid regulator names: CHARGER, SAFEOUT.
> +
> + The SAFEOUT is a fixed voltage regulator so there is no need to specify
> + voltages for it.
> +
> +
> +Example:
> +
> +#include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/irq.h>
> +
> +max14577@25 {
> + compatible = "maxim,max14577";
> + reg = <0x25>;
> + interrupt-parent = <&gpx1>;
> + interrupts = <5 IRQ_TYPE_NONE>;
> +
> + muic: max14577-muic {
> + compatible = "maxim,max14577-muic";
> + };
> +
> + regulators {
> + compatible = "maxim,max14577-regulator";
> +
> + safeout_reg: regulator@1 {
> + regulator-compatible = "SAFEOUT";
> + regulator-name = "SAFEOUT";
> + };
> + charger_reg: regulator@0 {
> + regulator-compatible = "CHARGER";
> + regulator-name = "CHARGER";
> + regulator-min-microamp = <90000>;
> + regulator-max-microamp = <950000>;
> + regulator-boot-on;
> + };
> + };
> +};
>
Now this patch creates a question whether we should keep the existing
black-box MFD scheme, where the list of cells is determined by an array
hardcoded inside the driver or rather we should completely move to DT
based description where of_mfd_populate() could create all MFD cells
using description from DT.
Best regards,
Tomasz
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
