On Fri, Oct 22, 2021 at 03:15:59PM -0400, Jim Quinlan wrote: > On Fri, Oct 22, 2021 at 10:31 AM Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Oct 22, 2021 at 10:06:57AM -0400, Jim Quinlan wrote: > > > > > +static const char * const supplies[] = { > > > + "vpcie3v3-supply", > > > + "vpcie3v3aux-supply", > > > + "brcm-ep-a-supply", > > > + "brcm-ep-b-supply", > > > +}; > > > > Why are you including "-supply" in the names here? That will lead to > > a double -supply when we look in the DT which probably isn't what you're > > looking for. > I'm not sure how this got past testing; will fix. > > > > > Also are you *sure* that the device has supplies with names like > > "brcm-ep-a"? That seems rather unidiomatic for electrical engineering, > > the names here are supposed to correspond to the names used in the > > datasheet for the part. > I try to explain this in the commit message of"PCI: allow for callback > to prepare nascent subdev". Wrt to the names, > > "These regulators typically govern the actual power supply to the > endpoint chip. Sometimes they may be a the official PCIe socket > power -- such as 3.3v or aux-3.3v. Sometimes they are truly > the regulator(s) that supply power to the EP chip." > > Each different SOC./board we deal with may present different ways of > making the EP device power on. We are using > an abstraction name "brcm-ep-a" to represent some required regulator > to make the EP work for a specific board. The RC > driver cannot hard code a descriptive name as it must work for all > boards designed by us, others, and third parties. > The EP driver also doesn't know or care about the regulator name, and > this driver is often closed source and often immutable. The EP > device itself may come from Brcm, a third party, or sometimes a competitor. > > Basically, we find using a generic name such as "brcm-ep-a-supply" > quite handy and many of our customers embrace this feature. > I know that Rob was initially against such a generic name, but I > vaguely remember him seeing some merit to this, perhaps a tiny bit :-) > Or my memory is shot, which could very well be the case. I don't recall being in favor of this. If you've got standard rails (3.3V and 12V), then I'm fine with standard properties for them with or without a slot. Rob