Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-49869-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.48.161 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.48.161;
Precedence: bulk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2024 13:55:42 +0100
Message-Id: <CYULY1BYVCYK.1EGSBSVNRSTLQ@gimli.ms.mff.cuni.cz>
Cc: "Karel Balej" <balejk@matfyz.cz>, "Dmitry Torokhov"
 <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>, "Rob Herring" <robh+dt@kernel.org>, "Krzysztof
 Kozlowski" <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>, "Conor Dooley"
 <conor+dt@kernel.org>, <linux-input@vger.kernel.org>,
 <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
 =?utf-8?q?Duje_Mihanovi=C4=87?= <duje.mihanovic@skole.hr>,
 <~postmarketos/upstreaming@lists.sr.ht>, <phone-devel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/5] mfd: add 88pm88x driver
To: "Lee Jones" <lee@kernel.org>
From: "Karel Balej" <karelb@gimli.ms.mff.cuni.cz>
References: <20231217131838.7569-1-karelb@gimli.ms.mff.cuni.cz>
 <20231217131838.7569-3-karelb@gimli.ms.mff.cuni.cz>
 <20240125122634.GE74950@google.com>
 <CYQ8MEQRJELE.2GB9316NZA998@gimli.ms.mff.cuni.cz>
 <20240131110311.GI8551@google.com>
 <CYTURHOW0WMR.2UMOT0D1GFZ2W@gimli.ms.mff.cuni.cz>
 <20240202124550.GE1379817@google.com>
In-Reply-To: <20240202124550.GE1379817@google.com>

Lee Jones, 2024-02-02T12:45:50+00:00:
> On Thu, 01 Feb 2024, Karel Balej wrote:
>
> > Lee Jones, 2024-01-31T11:03:11+00:00:
> > > On Sun, 28 Jan 2024, Karel Balej wrote:
> > > > > > +	/* GPIO1: DVC, GPIO0: input */
> > > > > > +	REG_SEQ0(PM88X_REG_GPIO_CTRL1, 0x40),
> > > > >
> > > > > Shouldn't you set these up using Pintrl?
> > > >=20
> > > > You mean to add a new MFD cell for the pins and write the respectiv=
e
> > > > driver? The downstream implementation has no such thing so I'm not =
sure
> > > > if I would be able to do that from scratch.
> > >
> > > This is not a Pinctrl driver.
> > >
> > > Isn't there a generic API you can use?
> >=20
> > I'm sorry, I don't think I understand what you mean.
>
> Perhaps I misunderstand the code.  It looks like this regmap patch hack
> is configuring pins and a bunch of other things.  Would that be a
> correct assessment?

Yes, that sounds correct.

> If so, where do we draw the line here?  Do we accept a 1000 line driver
> which configures a large SoC with a bunch of bespoke register writes?

I understand, I just don't know what you mean by "a generic API". I'm
also not clear on whether what you have in mind is simply adding a
dedicated driver for the pins as a new subdevice of this MFD.

Thanks,
K. B.