On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 2:39 PM Matti Vaittinen <matti.vaittinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Support GPO(s) found from ROHM BD71815 power management IC. The IC has two > GPO pins but only one is properly documented in data-sheet. The driver > exposes by default only the documented GPO. The second GPO is connected to > E5 pin and is marked as GND in data-sheet. Control for this undocumented > pin can be enabled using a special DT property. > > This driver is derived from work by Peter Yang <yanglsh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > although not so much of original is left. > > Signed-off-by: Matti Vaittinen <matti.vaittinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Overall this looks good! > + depends on MFD_ROHM_BD71828 I suppose this makes i possible to merge out-of-order with the core patches actually. > +#define DEBUG Why? Development artifact? > +#include <linux/kthread.h> You certainly do not need this. > +#include <linux/mfd/rohm-bd71815.h> > +#include <linux/mfd/rohm-generic.h> I guess registers come from these? Do you need both? Add a comment about what they provide. > + g->chip.ngpio = 1; > + if (g->e5_pin_is_gpo) > + g->chip.ngpio = 2; Overwriting value, how not elegant. if (g->e5_pin_is_gpo) g->chip.ngpio = 2; else g->chip.ngpio = 1; > + g->chip.parent = pdev->dev.parent; > + g->chip.of_node = pdev->dev.parent->of_node; > + g->regmap = dev_get_regmap(pdev->dev.parent, NULL); > + g->dev = &pdev->dev; > + > + ret = devm_gpiochip_add_data(&pdev->dev, &g->chip, g); > + if (ret < 0) { > + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "could not register gpiochip, %d\n", ret); > + return ret; > + } It's a bit confusing how you use pdev->dev.parent for some stuff and &pdev->dev for some. What about assinging struct device *dev = pdev->dev.parent; and use dev for all the calls, it looks like it'd work fine. Yours, Linus Walleij