On 3/21/25 09:53, Encarnacion, Cedric justine wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Encarnacion, Cedric justine
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2025 12:10 PM
To: Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx>; Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>;
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>; Jean Delvare <jdelvare@xxxxxxxx>;
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx>; Delphine CC Chiu
<Delphine_CC_Chiu@xxxxxxxxxx>; devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-
kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-hwmon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-
doc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-i2c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: hwmon: pmbus: add lt3074
-----Original Message-----
From: Guenter Roeck <groeck7@xxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Guenter Roeck
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2025 11:17 PM
To: Encarnacion, Cedric justine
<Cedricjustine.Encarnacion@xxxxxxxxxx>;
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx>; Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzk+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>; Conor Dooley <conor+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>; Jean Delvare
<jdelvare@xxxxxxxx>; Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx>; Delphine CC
Chiu <Delphine_CC_Chiu@xxxxxxxxxx>; devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-
kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-hwmon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-
doc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-i2c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: hwmon: pmbus: add lt3074
[External]
On 3/18/25 03:03, Encarnacion, Cedric justine wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Guenter Roeck <groeck7@xxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Guenter Roeck
Sent: Friday, February 28, 2025 12:33 AM
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx>; Encarnacion, Cedric justine
<Cedricjustine.Encarnacion@xxxxxxxxxx>; Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzk+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>; Conor Dooley <conor+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>; Jean
Delvare <jdelvare@xxxxxxxx>; Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx>;
Delphine CC Chiu <Delphine_CC_Chiu@xxxxxxxxxx>;
devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux- kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
linux-hwmon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux- doc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
linux-i2c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: hwmon: pmbus: add lt3074
diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus.h
b/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus.h index ddb19c9726d6..289767e5d599
100644
--- a/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus.h
+++ b/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus.h
@@ -512,7 +512,6 @@ int pmbus_regulator_init_cb(struct
regulator_dev
*rdev,
{ \
.name = (_name), \
.of_match = of_match_ptr(_name), \
- .regulators_node = of_match_ptr("regulators"), \
.ops = &pmbus_regulator_ops, \
.type = REGULATOR_VOLTAGE, \
.owner = THIS_MODULE, \
Maybe someone can check if that works.
Thanks,
Guenter
I'd like to follow up on this one. As of this writing, my
understanding is that the dt-binding should not expect regulators
subnodes for simple devices like this. There is already a similar
binding as mentioned in this thread particularly
"dt-bindings/regulator/infineon,ir38060". I think a binding without
the subnodes should still work with or without the change above.
Interesting. I am not sure if it really works, though. I looked into
the regulator code, and I don't immediately see the code path it would
take.
With this, I'd like to know what the specific next steps are to
continue this patch series.
Can you try on hardware using a devicetree file which doesn't have the
regulators node ? If the current code works, just submit an updated
(simplified) .yaml file and we should be good. If not, I have an
untested patch series introducing another macro which doesn't set the
regulators node.
Okay. I'll test this and get back to you.
The "simplified" dt file (without the regulators node) does not work with
the current regulator_desc macro. I have also tried simply removing the
regulators_node setting from the regulator_desc macro, and it does not
work too. of_match looks for a certain regulator name in dt, and it seems
I just noticed the above. A NULL regulators_node should actually work. From
drivers/regulator/of_regulator.c:regulator_of_get_init_node():
if (desc->regulators_node) {
search = of_get_child_by_name(dev->of_node,
desc->regulators_node);
} else {
search = of_node_get(dev->of_node);
if (!strcmp(desc->of_match, search->name))
return search;
}
So, yes, there has to be a name match, but that is on the node describing
the chip. That is how all single-regulator chips are supposed to work.
Guenter
