On Wed, 09 Oct 2024, Lee Jones wrote: > On Thu, 26 Sep 2024, Matti Vaittinen wrote: > > > A few ROHM PMICs have an RTC block which can be controlled by the > > rtc-bd70528 driver. The RTC driver needs the alarm interrupt information > > from the parent MFD driver. The MFD driver provides the interrupt > > information as a set of named interrupts, where the name is of form: > > <PMIC model>-rtc-alm-<x>, where x is an alarm block number. > > > > From the RTC driver point of view it is irrelevant what the PMIC name > > is. It is sufficient to know this is alarm interrupt for a block X. The > > PMIC model information is carried to RTC via the platform device ID. > > Hence, having the PMIC model in the interrupt name is only making things > > more complex because the RTC driver needs to request differently named > > interrupts on different PMICs, making code unnecessary complicated. > > > > Simplify this slightly by always using the RTC driver name 'bd70528' as > > the prefix for alarm interrupts, no matter what the exact PMIC model is, > > and always request the alarm interrupts of same name no matter what the > > PMIC model is. > > > > Signed-off-by: Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > This contains both the RTC and MFD changes in order to not break the > > functionality between commits to different subsystems. > > I can take it with an RTC Ack and an indication whether an immutable > branch should be created and shared. I fear this may have fallen from Alexandre's queue. Please submit as a RESEND. -- Lee Jones [李琼斯]
