Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1751544AbaDWWJ5 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 23 Apr 2014 18:09:57 -0400
Received: from seldrel01.sonyericsson.com ([212.209.106.2]:4765 "EHLO
	seldrel01.sonyericsson.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK)
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751269AbaDWWJy (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 23 Apr 2014 18:09:54 -0400
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2014 15:12:00 -0700
From: Courtney Cavin <courtney.cavin@sonymobile.com>
To: "Ivan T. Ivanov" <iivanov@mm-sol.com>
CC: Samuel Ortiz <sameo@linux.intel.com>, Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>,
        Josh Cartwright <joshc@codeaurora.org>,
        Grant Likely <grant.likely@linaro.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org" <linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mfd: pm8x41: add support for Qualcomm 8x41 PMICs
Message-ID: <20140423221200.GL17066@sonymobile.com>
References: <1398213110-28135-1-git-send-email-courtney.cavin@sonymobile.com>
 <1398259168.4724.217.camel@iivanov-dev>
 <20140423181614.GK17066@sonymobile.com>
 <1398285272.14329.6.camel@violet>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1398285272.14329.6.camel@violet>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 10:34:32PM +0200, Ivan T. Ivanov wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 2014-04-23 at 11:16 -0700, Courtney Cavin wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 03:19:28PM +0200, Ivan T. Ivanov wrote:
> > > 
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > On Tue, 2014-04-22 at 17:31 -0700, Courtney Cavin wrote:
> > > > From: Josh Cartwright <joshc@codeaurora.org>
> > > > 
> > > > The Qualcomm 8941 and 8841 PMICs are components used with the Snapdragon
> > > > 800 series SoC family.  This driver exists largely as a glue mfd component,
> > > > it exists to be an owner of an SPMI regmap for children devices
> > > > described in device tree.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Thanks. This is exactly what I have planed to do :-)
> > > 
> > 
> > Sorry if I usurped your work!
> 
> Noting to worry. I just was surprised how close it is to my vision ;-).
> 

Well, you might notice how extremely close it is to what Josh posted in
October in his SPMI series [1], so I can't take any credit there.

> > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Josh Cartwright <joshc@codeaurora.org>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Courtney Cavin <courtney.cavin@sonymobile.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  drivers/mfd/Kconfig  | 13 +++++++++++
> > > >  drivers/mfd/Makefile |  1 +
> > > >  drivers/mfd/pm8x41.c | 63 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > >  3 files changed, 77 insertions(+)
> > > >  create mode 100644 drivers/mfd/pm8x41.c
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > <snip>
> > > 
> > > > +
> > > > +static int pm8x41_probe(struct spmi_device *sdev)
> > > > +{
> > > > +	struct regmap *regmap;
> > > > +
> > > > +	regmap = devm_regmap_init_spmi_ext(sdev, &pm8x41_regmap_config);
> > > > +	if (IS_ERR(regmap)) {
> > > > +		dev_dbg(&sdev->dev, "regmap creation failed.\n");
> > > > +		return PTR_ERR(regmap);
> > > > +	}
> > > > +
> > > > +	return of_platform_populate(sdev->dev.of_node, NULL, NULL, &sdev->dev);
> > > 
> > > I think that this will not going to work. For example in this particular
> > > case, both controllers have "qcom,qpnp-revid" peripheral which is
> > > located at offset 0x100.
> > > 
> > > And the result is:
> > > 
> > > [    0.963944] sysfs: cannot create duplicate filename '/bus/platform/devices/100.revid'
> > > 
> > [...]
> > > 
> > > Any suggestions?
> > 
> > That's expected behavior actually.  You have two nodes in DT named the
> > same thing and at the same address.  This error is due to the fact that
> > all devices are put in '/bus/platform/devices/' with a name made from
> > the unit address and name specified in DT.  There's no other unique
> > information used to differentiate the devices.
> > 
> > If you simply change the names in DT, it works.  
> 
> Sure, it will work. But they are part of different address spaces. 
> Why we should add, IMHO, artificial requirement that names should
> be unique? Is it possible to prefix child nodes with parent device 
> address? As side note, why they should be registered on the platform
> bus at all? To be honest I don't have solution.

I agree, and it would appear that the ePAPR does as well.  Feel free to
send patches!

> > [...] qcom,qpnp-revid 100.qcom,pm8841-revid: PM8841 v2.0 options: 0, 0, 2, 2
> > [...] qcom,qpnp-revid 100.qcom,pm8941-revid: PM8941 v3.0 options: 2, 0, 0, 0
> > 
> > Whether this should be "fixed" in the device/bus/sysfs core, I don't
> > know, but it isn't specifically an issue with this driver, and there's
> > little-to-nothing I can do to fix it here.
> > 
> > -Courtney
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/