Re: [PATCH v2] dt-bindings: hwmon: tda38640: Add interrupt & regulator properties

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

 



On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 02:55:03PM +0530, Naresh Solanki wrote:
> Add properties for interrupt & regulator.
> Also update example.

I feel like a broken record. Your patches need to explain _why_ you're
doing what you're doing. I can read the diff and see this, but I do not
know what the justification for it is.

/30 seconds later
I really am a broken record, to quote from v1:
| Feeling like a broken record, given I am leaving the same comments on
| multiple patches. The commit message needs to explain why you're doing
| something. I can read the diff and see what you did!

https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240126-fleshed-subdued-36bae813e2ba@spud/

The patch itself does look better than the v1, with one minor comment
below.

Thanks,
Conor.

> Signed-off-by: Naresh Solanki <naresh.solanki@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> ---
> Changes in v2:
> 1. Remove TEST=..
> 2. Update regulator subnode property as vout0
> 3. Restore commented line in example
> 4. blank line after interrupts property in example.
> ---
>  .../hwmon/pmbus/infineon,tda38640.yaml        | 28 +++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 28 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/hwmon/pmbus/infineon,tda38640.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/hwmon/pmbus/infineon,tda38640.yaml
> index ded1c115764b..a93b3f86ee87 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/hwmon/pmbus/infineon,tda38640.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/hwmon/pmbus/infineon,tda38640.yaml
> @@ -30,6 +30,23 @@ properties:
>        unconnected(has internal pull-down).
>      type: boolean
>  
> +  interrupts:
> +    maxItems: 1
> +
> +  regulators:
> +    type: object
> +    description:
> +      list of regulators provided by this controller.
> +
> +    properties:
> +      vout0:

Why "vout0" if there's only one output? Is it called that in the
documentation? I had a quick check but only saw it called "vout".
Are there other related devices that would have multiple regulators
that might end up sharing the binding?

Thanks,
Conor.

> +        $ref: /schemas/regulator/regulator.yaml#
> +        type: object
> +
> +        unevaluatedProperties: false
> +
> +    additionalProperties: false
> +
>  required:
>    - compatible
>    - reg
> @@ -38,6 +55,7 @@ additionalProperties: false
>  
>  examples:
>    - |
> +    #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/irq.h>
>      i2c {
>          #address-cells = <1>;
>          #size-cells = <0>;
> @@ -45,5 +63,15 @@ examples:
>          tda38640@40 {
>              compatible = "infineon,tda38640";
>              reg = <0x40>;
> +
> +            interrupt-parent = <&smb_pex_cpu0_event>;
> +            interrupts = <10 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW>;
> +
> +            regulators {
> +                pvnn_main_cpu0: vout0 {
> +                    regulator-name = "pvnn_main_cpu0";
> +                    regulator-enable-ramp-delay = <200>;
> +                };
> +            };
>          };
>      };
> 
> base-commit: 7e90b5c295ec1e47c8ad865429f046970c549a66
> -- 
> 2.42.0
> 

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


[Index of Archives]     [LM Sensors]     [Linux Sound]     [ALSA Users]     [ALSA Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Media]     [Kernel]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Media]

  Powered by Linux