W dniu 28.10.2015 o 20:21, Alim Akhtar pisze: > Hello, > > On 10/28/2015 02:16 PM, Lee Jones wrote: >> 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. >> > Well, I would have also preferred option a), but keeping existing DT > bindings, looks like we need to go with the current situation. > Krzysztof any thought on this? > Looks good to me. Please, go ahead. 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
 |