W dniu 28.10.2015 o 17:46, Lee Jones pisze: > On Wed, 28 Oct 2015, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >> On 26.10.2015 23:34, Lee Jones wrote: >>> On Mon, 26 Oct 2015, Alim Akhtar wrote: >>> >>>> From: Thomas Abraham <thomas.ab@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> >>>> Add support for S2MPS15 PMIC which is similar to S2MPS11 PMIC. The S2MPS15 >>>> PMIC supports 27 LDO regulators, 10 buck regulators, RTC, three 32.768KHz >>>> clock outputs and battery charger. This patch adds initial support for >>>> LDO and buck regulators of S2MPS15 device. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Abraham <thomas.ab@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> Signed-off-by: Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> [Alim: Added s2mps15_devs like rtc and clk and related changes] >>>> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> --- >>>> drivers/mfd/sec-core.c | 31 +++++++ >>>> drivers/mfd/sec-irq.c | 8 ++ >>>> include/linux/mfd/samsung/core.h | 1 + >>>> include/linux/mfd/samsung/s2mps15.h | 158 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>> 4 files changed, 198 insertions(+) >>>> create mode 100644 include/linux/mfd/samsung/s2mps15.h >>> >>> I replied to the previous set and won't be reviewing this one until >>> all of the open points are solved. >> >> The naming and compatibles used by the driver are confusing but how it >> was at beginning. Beside the confusion, the names are correct: >> >> 1. Main mfd driver: >> - compatible: samsung,s2mps1*-pmic >> - driver name: sec_pmic >> >> 2. Regulator driver: >> - no compatible (because it always searches for "regulators" subnode of >> its parent... that is the convention/legacy behaviour) >> - driver name: s2mps1*-pmic >> >> I hope that explains your concerns. > > It explains *why*, but doesn't ease my concerns in any way. > > Unfortunately I've only just realised the disparity we have between > MFD and the Regulator subsystem, which is annoying because it's now > almost impossible to rectify. > > We should have taken one of two views. Either a) The MFD is the PMIC > device which encompasses regulator control. In which case the MFD > and it's corresponding compatible string would be named *-pmic and the > regulator driver would be called *-regulator. Or b) The MFD could be > considered a normal MFD and be named after the model number, then the > regulator 'could' be named *-pmic. > > However, with reference to b), how much other Power Management does > the regulator driver do besides control regulators? I suspect not > much. Therefore my preference would be for a). My second choice > would be a mixuture of the two where nothing gets named *-pmic. The > last option on my list would be the current situation where we seem to > be calling both the MFD (PMIC) itself and the Regulator driver > *-pmic, which is not good. Starting from the description of device-family. This is called "Power Management IC" but it is rather a "Power Deliver/Distribute IC". There isn't any logic inside except enable/disable/configure/set low power mode for regulators. However in the same time the IC comes (always) with: - 32kHz clocks, - RTC, - backup battery charger (no driver for it), - reset for SoC, - shutdown on thermal alert (also no driver for this control). The solution a) seems fine to me. Make sense and it looks entirely backward compatible - only driver names will be modified. Best regards, Krzysztof -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
 |