On Wed Aug 30, 2023 at 12:06 PM CEST, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 30/08/2023 11:58, Luca Weiss wrote:
> > Like other Qualcomm PMICs the PM7250B can be used on different addresses
> > on the SPMI bus. Use similar defines like the PMK8350 to make this
> > possible.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Luca Weiss <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm7250b.dtsi | 23 ++++++++++++++++-------
> > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm7250b.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm7250b.dtsi
> > index e8540c36bd99..3514de536baa 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm7250b.dtsi
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm7250b.dtsi
> > @@ -7,6 +7,15 @@
> > #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/irq.h>
> > #include <dt-bindings/spmi/spmi.h>
> >
> > +/* This PMIC can be configured to be at different SIDs */
> > +#ifndef PM7250B_SID
> > + #define PM7250B_SID 2
> > +#endif
>
> Why do you send the same patch as v1, without any reference to previous
> discussions?
>
> You got here feedback already.
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/[email protected]/
Hi Krzysztof,
I did mention that original patch in the cover letter of this series.
I'm definitely aware of the discussion earlier this year there but also
tried to get an update lately if there's any update with no response.
If you want to block this patch, I'll have to remove pm7250b from the
device dts, so we'll lose some functionality. Not sure what other
approaches there could be.
Regards
Luca
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
On Thu, 31 Aug 2023 at 13:13, Luca Weiss <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Wed Aug 30, 2023 at 12:06 PM CEST, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > On 30/08/2023 11:58, Luca Weiss wrote:
> > > Like other Qualcomm PMICs the PM7250B can be used on different addresses
> > > on the SPMI bus. Use similar defines like the PMK8350 to make this
> > > possible.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Luca Weiss <[email protected]>
> > > ---
> > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm7250b.dtsi | 23 ++++++++++++++++-------
> > > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm7250b.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm7250b.dtsi
> > > index e8540c36bd99..3514de536baa 100644
> > > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm7250b.dtsi
> > > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm7250b.dtsi
> > > @@ -7,6 +7,15 @@
> > > #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/irq.h>
> > > #include <dt-bindings/spmi/spmi.h>
> > >
> > > +/* This PMIC can be configured to be at different SIDs */
> > > +#ifndef PM7250B_SID
> > > + #define PM7250B_SID 2
> > > +#endif
> >
> > Why do you send the same patch as v1, without any reference to previous
> > discussions?
> >
> > You got here feedback already.
> >
> > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/[email protected]/
>
> Hi Krzysztof,
>
> I did mention that original patch in the cover letter of this series.
> I'm definitely aware of the discussion earlier this year there but also
> tried to get an update lately if there's any update with no response.
I think the overall consensus was that my proposal is too complicated
for the DT files.
>
> If you want to block this patch, I'll have to remove pm7250b from the
> device dts, so we'll lose some functionality. Not sure what other
> approaches there could be.
>
> Regards
> Luca
>
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Krzysztof
>
--
With best wishes
Dmitry