Hi,
On 1/4/2025 12:16 PM, Roger Quadros wrote:
>
> On 04/01/2025 00:57, Shree Ramamoorthy wrote:
>> The chipid macro/variable and regmap_read function call is not needed
>> because the TPS65219_REG_TI_DEV_ID register value is not a consistent value
>> across TPS65219 PMIC config versions. Reading from the DEV_ID register
>> without a consistent value to compare it to isn't useful. There isn't a
>> way to verify the match data ID is the same ID read from the DEV_ID device
>> register. 0xF0 isn't a DEV_ID value consistent across TPS65219 NVM
>> configurations.
>>
>> For TPS65215, there is a consistent value in bits 5-0 of the DEV_ID
>> register. However, there are other error checks in place within probe()
>> that apply to both PMICs rather than keeping this isolated check for one
>> PMIC.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Shree Ramamoorthy <s-ramamoorthy@xxxxxx>
> In that case this could be squashed with 1?
Since this change does not have to do with TPS65215 support directly
and is a different type of change, I wanted to keep this patch separate.
I can instead have this patch be first, then the MFD add TPS65215 support
will follow this to avoid any confusion about regmap_read being modified then removed.
>> ---
>> drivers/mfd/tps65219.c | 6 ------
>> include/linux/mfd/tps65219.h | 2 --
>> 2 files changed, 8 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/tps65219.c b/drivers/mfd/tps65219.c
>> index 816b271990a2..d3267bf7cd77 100644
>> --- a/drivers/mfd/tps65219.c
>> +++ b/drivers/mfd/tps65219.c
>> @@ -382,12 +382,6 @@ static int tps65219_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
>> if (ret)
>> return ret;
>>
>> - ret = regmap_read(tps->regmap, TPS65219_REG_TI_DEV_ID, &tps->chip_id);
>> - if (ret) {
>> - dev_err(tps->dev, "Failed to read device ID: %d\n", ret);
>> - return ret;
>> - }
>> -
>> ret = devm_mfd_add_devices(tps->dev, PLATFORM_DEVID_AUTO,
>> pmic->cells, pmic->n_cells,
>> NULL, 0, regmap_irq_get_domain(tps->irq_data));
>> diff --git a/include/linux/mfd/tps65219.h b/include/linux/mfd/tps65219.h
>> index 9892b6e4c85c..535115bfa4a4 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/mfd/tps65219.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/mfd/tps65219.h
>> @@ -15,8 +15,6 @@
>> #include <linux/regmap.h>
>> #include <linux/regulator/driver.h>
>>
>> -/* TPS chip id list */
>> -#define TPS65219 0xF0
>> /* Chip id list*/
>> enum pmic_id {
>> TPS65215,
> Looking at TRM, TPS65215 device_id is 0x15 and TPS6521901 device_id is 0x00.
>
> shouldn't we use that here as well?
The device_id value set varies across TPS65219 hardware versions.
Having the device_id as the chip_id differentiator will fail for TPS65219,
even though the system engineers have now kept the TPS65215 device_id value
consistent across all hardware versions.
