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;
Message-ID: <633b305e-a311-3334-3d4e-30d5d09ebb6a@linaro.org>
Date:   Sat, 13 May 2023 20:00:05 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.11.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/10] pinctrl: cs42l43: Add support for the cs42l43
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Charles Keepax <ckeepax@opensource.cirrus.com>
Cc:     broonie@kernel.org, lee@kernel.org, robh+dt@kernel.org,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org, conor+dt@kernel.org,
        tglx@linutronix.de, maz@kernel.org, linus.walleij@linaro.org,
        vkoul@kernel.org, lgirdwood@gmail.com,
        yung-chuan.liao@linux.intel.com, sanyog.r.kale@intel.com,
        pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com, alsa-devel@alsa-project.org,
        patches@opensource.cirrus.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-spi@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20230512122838.243002-1-ckeepax@opensource.cirrus.com>
 <20230512122838.243002-9-ckeepax@opensource.cirrus.com>
 <9591999e-9d7f-2a4a-29df-d9c42dfa736b@linaro.org>
 <20230512155426.GJ68926@ediswmail.ad.cirrus.com>
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
In-Reply-To: <20230512155426.GJ68926@ediswmail.ad.cirrus.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 12/05/2023 17:54, Charles Keepax wrote:
> On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 05:30:37PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 12/05/2023 14:28, Charles Keepax wrote:
>>> +	priv->gpio_chip.fwnode = dev_fwnode(cs42l43->dev);

What's also a bit confusing is that gpio_chip is the parent's node, but
pinctrl is not...

>>> +
>>> +	if (is_of_node(dev_fwnode(cs42l43->dev))) {
>>> +		device_set_node(priv->dev,
>>> +				fwnode_get_named_child_node(dev_fwnode(cs42l43->dev),
>>> +							    "pinctrl"));
>>
>> That's something unusual. It seems you want to bind to a DT node because
>> you miss compatible in DT node?
>>
> 
> Kinda, I don't really want to add multiple compatibles for the
> device. This is just a CODEC device, even in device tree it
> seems a little weird to have multiple compatibles for a single
> I2C device. On ACPI I am pretty sure it would be considered flat
> out right wrong. The fact Linux supports the device using multiple
> drivers is seemed to be a Linux implementation detail, rather than
> describing the hardware.
> 

I think if you do not have compatible, then the device node should be
rather the parent (so the main node with compatible), not the child.
Child is just a wrapper for pinctrls, but not something representing a
device.

Best regards,
Krzysztof