Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-174643-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1;
Date: Thu, 9 May 2024 17:38:26 +0200
From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@gmail.com>
Cc: Matti Vaittinen <matti.vaittinen@fi.rohmeurope.com>,
	Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
	Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@linux-watchdog.org>,
	Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/6] Support ROHM BD96801 scalable PMIC
Message-ID: <Zjzt8mOW6dO_7XNV@finisterre.sirena.org.uk>
References: <cover.1712058690.git.mazziesaccount@gmail.com>
 <f7d454ac-6ecb-4431-a1de-c9b5d1240969@gmail.com>
 <eb03ec33-0627-4986-be04-8e35da390d6b@sirena.org.uk>
 <b6279be8-cf7d-4608-b556-3c01587f0d43@gmail.com>
 <f1e3d31d-8c24-4cdc-ae26-747f383a937b@gmail.com>
 <b6ded975-1d16-46ea-84a2-8799b36e1270@gmail.com>
 <ZjxaP_BNWVufJb_X@finisterre.sirena.org.uk>
 <0674ca23-2cf2-48a6-84d3-e0936d50dd8c@gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="EXBB/dSJ5rRrt8TM"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <0674ca23-2cf2-48a6-84d3-e0936d50dd8c@gmail.com>


--EXBB/dSJ5rRrt8TM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline

On Thu, May 09, 2024 at 10:03:43AM +0300, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
> On 5/9/24 08:08, Mark Brown wrote:

> > > > > > So if we arrange to supply a name when we register multiple domains
> > > > > > things should work fine?

> Thanks for the guidance Mark. The controller name is not a problem. Problem
> is that I don't see a (proper) way to supply a name for the IRQ domain which
> gets registered by regmap-IRQ. IRQ domain code picks the name for the domain
> by the device-tree node. Both of our IRQ controllers would be instantiated
> from same node => the IRQ domain will get same name => debugfs will
> conflict.

That's why I'm suggesting to add something - just put a name field in
the struct.

> My "solution" was simply dropping the ERRB IRQ from the driver (for now at
> least). I did send that as a series without 'RFC' - but made a mistake and
> restarted the versioning from v1. I am currently working with 2 other PMICs,
> one of them does also provide similar setup of two IRQ lines. Thus, I think
> being able to provide a name (suffix?) for IRQ domain when registering it
> instead of just using the name of the DT node is something I should look
> into. It's just nice to know someone else thinks it is valid approach.

Yes.

--EXBB/dSJ5rRrt8TM
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAABCgAdFiEEreZoqmdXGLWf4p/qJNaLcl1Uh9AFAmY87fIACgkQJNaLcl1U
h9CVlAf/acARHE9oLNx/H5/+ylgEpV9IP4mlgCrINDGVbXsV3GC0CUug/nmiJsiQ
YBLdl280Fq0Gd1wOAnIfLLqEbvs05J9fcjkzTzXkQ8t0TtPN7B5taf4Hsnm0bHEm
5mevVDR7BSV/ZvLMq5VFEl3SALsmPcso5LVsD/j5ZSfPs7Vpg/pGkTruihBMPUp5
DQGaddEJYXm1Dy1rOY3CPuHsnjPOuVdyUEVouTARyrluafKT819eqhMd8jpYtrDX
36RNbVfxrwirUBKTZpuOlj/a4zxxtpp2BV3iWSoyWXK5lipnpLYlJGXb4KQrDr2S
LBJcz8g+LS2wF2OVXtakMVzunxOAsA==
=Ry6h
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--EXBB/dSJ5rRrt8TM--