Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Wed, 29 Mar 2023 16:06:05 +0100
From:   Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Cc:     "Sahin, Okan" <Okan.Sahin@analog.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
        Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>,
        Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>,
        Cosmin Tanislav <demonsingur@gmail.com>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>,
        Caleb Connolly <caleb.connolly@linaro.org>,
        Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com>,
        "Bolboaca, Ramona" <Ramona.Bolboaca@analog.com>,
        ChiYuan Huang <cy_huang@richtek.com>,
        "Tilki, Ibrahim" <Ibrahim.Tilki@analog.com>,
        William Breathitt Gray <william.gray@linaro.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        ChiaEn Wu <chiaen_wu@richtek.com>,
        Haibo Chen <haibo.chen@nxp.com>,
        "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-iio@vger.kernel.org" <linux-iio@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 5/5]  mfd: max77541: Add ADI MAX77541/MAX77540 PMIC
 Support
Message-ID: <20230329150605.GW2673958@google.com>
References: <20230307112835.81886-1-okan.sahin@analog.com>
 <20230307112835.81886-6-okan.sahin@analog.com>
 <20230315175223.GI9667@google.com>
 <20230315175257.GJ9667@google.com>
 <MN2PR03MB5168249900206433A082875EE7889@MN2PR03MB5168.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <20230329143615.GS2673958@google.com>
 <ZCROpw0il1VQCLPu@smile.fi.intel.com>
 <20230329145636.GV2673958@google.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <20230329145636.GV2673958@google.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, 29 Mar 2023, Lee Jones wrote:

> On Wed, 29 Mar 2023, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 03:36:15PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > On Tue, 28 Mar 2023, Sahin, Okan wrote:
> > > > >On Wed, 15 Mar 2023, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > > >> On Tue, 07 Mar 2023, Okan Sahin wrote:
> >
> > ...
> >
> > > > +static const struct i2c_device_id max77541_i2c_id[] = {
> > > > +	{ "max77540", (kernel_ulong_t)&chip[MAX77540] },
> > > > +	{ "max77541", (kernel_ulong_t)&chip[MAX77541] },
> > >
> > > Just 'MAX77540' is fine.
> >
> > I tend to disagree.
> >
> > There is an error prone approach esp. when we talk with some functions
> > that unifies OF/ACPI driver data retrieval with legacy ID tables.
> > In such a case the 0 from enum is hard to distinguish from NULL when
> > the driver data is not set or not found. On top of that the simple integer
> > in the legacy driver data will require additional code to be added in
> > the ->probe().
>
> Use a !0 enum?
>
> The extra handling is expected and normal.

I've always disliked mixing platform initialisation strategies.  Passing
pointers to MFD structs through I2C/Device Tree registration opens the
doors to all sorts of funky interlaced nonsense.

Pass the device ID and then match in C-code please.

--
Lee Jones [李琼斯]