Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754529AbdGNPGQ (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Jul 2017 11:06:16 -0400 Received: from mailgw01.mediatek.com ([210.61.82.183]:27862 "EHLO mailgw01.mediatek.com" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754176AbdGNPGP (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Jul 2017 11:06:15 -0400 Message-ID: <1500044768.16278.37.camel@mtkswgap22> Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/9] regulator: mt6380: Add support for MT6380 From: Sean Wang To: Mark Brown CC: , , , , , , , , , , Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2017 23:06:08 +0800 In-Reply-To: <1498236198.20651.32.camel@mtkswgap22> References: <4276ab23ae0bbb6a54b1add98c4dc668f1a69c50.1496425268.git.sean.wang@mediatek.com> <20170606182224.sifkfod7hehadjvm@sirena.org.uk> <1498233365.20651.25.camel@mtkswgap22> <20170623161420.tbhn6sjuz7jjhaiu@sirena.org.uk> <1498236198.20651.32.camel@mtkswgap22> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.3-0ubuntu6 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MTK: N Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2791 Lines: 68 On Sat, 2017-06-24 at 00:43 +0800, Sean Wang wrote: > On Fri, 2017-06-23 at 17:14 +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 11:56:05PM +0800, Sean Wang wrote: > > > On Tue, 2017-06-06 at 19:22 +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > > > > > > + return (regval & info->desc.enable_mask) ? > > > > > + REGULATOR_STATUS_ON : REGULATOR_STATUS_OFF; > > > > > > This isn't really a get_status() operation - it's just showing the > > > > status of the enable we set. The get_status() operation is for hardware > > > > that has a mechanism for reading back the current physical status of the > > > > regulator, usually including things like if it's in regulation or not. > > > > > > Also please write normal conditional statements, it helps people read > > > > the code. > > > > > for the hardware, the way for reflect the current physical physical > > > has to depend on the bit reading as the bit we enable. It indeed tends > > > to confuse other users and developers, we maybe can add some comments > > > for this to avoid. > > > > It's OK to just not have a get_status() operation - a lot of regulators > > just can't do this and that's fine, the subsystem will cope. > > > > understood. it seems to be better with subsystem coping. we'll remove > get_status callback. > Hi, Mark We usually want to use /sys/class/regulator/regulator.*/status to get actual status from hardware, but if we remove the get_status(), the status entry under sysfs would be gone. So could I keep the get_status callback in this driver ? Sean > > > > > +static const struct of_device_id mt6380_of_match[] = { > > > > > + { .compatible = "mediatek,mt6380-regulator", }, > > > > > + { /* sentinel */ }, > > > > > +}; > > > > > +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, mt6380_of_match); > > > > > > Given that this driver is entirely specific to the parent PMIC there > > > > should be no need for a separate compatible string, it's redundant. > > > > > the parent of pmic is MediaTek pwrap which is possibly being used with > > > various pmics such as MT6323, MT6797, MT6380 and so on. So extra > > > matching we thought is required to identify which pmic is actually being > > > connected. > > > > > For those opinions, maybe we didn't get your exact point. If something > > > is wrong, please kindly guide us to the right place. > > > > It sounds like pwrap should be a bus rather than using a platform device > > here? But I guess that's how things are for now so OK. > > yes, it is a bus , a proprietary bus, which is something like > encapsulation of spi and there's some protocol running on this > between master/slave. > > > _______________________________________________ > Linux-mediatek mailing list > Linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mediatek