Hi Matti-san, > From: Vaittinen, Matti, Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2020 3:00 PM > On Wed, 2020-12-16 at 02:13 +0000, Yoshihiro Shimoda wrote: > > Hi Geert-san, Matti-san, > > > > > From: Geert Uytterhoeven, Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2020 1:13 > > > AM > > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 5:02 PM Geert Uytterhoeven < > > > geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 3:03 PM Vaittinen, Matti > > > > <Matti.Vaittinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > On Fri, 2020-12-11 at 20:27 +0900, Yoshihiro Shimoda wrote: > > <snip> > > > > > > --- a/drivers/regulator/bd9571mwv-regulator.c > > > > > > +++ b/drivers/regulator/bd9571mwv-regulator.c > > > > > > @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ > > > > > > #include <linux/mfd/bd9571mwv.h> > > > > > > > > > > > > struct bd9571mwv_reg { > > > > > > - struct bd9571mwv *bd; > > > > > > + struct regmap *regmap; > > > > > > > > > > As a 'nit': > > > > > I might consider adding the dev pointer here to avoid extra > > > > > argument > > > > > with all the bkup_mode functions below. (just pass this struct > > > > > and > > > > > mode). But that's only my preference - feel free to ignore this > > > > > comment > > > > > if patch is Ok to Mark, Marek & Others :) > > > > > > > > Struct regmap already contains a struct device pointer, but > > > > that's internal > > > > to regmap. > > > > > > > > Perhaps adding a regmap_device() helper to retrieve the device > > > > pointer > > > > might be worthwhile? > > > > > > -EEXISTS ;-) > > > > > > struct device *regmap_get_device(struct regmap *map) > > > > Thank you for finding this. I'll fix this patch. > > Just a small reminder that this device is probably the MFD device, not > the device created for regulator driver. (Regmap is created for MFD). > For prints this only means we're issuing prints as if MFD device > generated them, right? I'm not sure it is the best approach - but I'll > leave this to Mark & others to judge :) Thank you for the comment. You're correct. regmap_get_device() is the MFD device. Also, original code had used the MFD device as "dev_err(bd->dev, ...)". So, printk behavior is the same as before :) Best regards, Yoshihiro Shimoda