On Wed, 28 Oct 2015, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > W dniu 28.10.2015 o 17:46, Lee Jones pisze: > > On Wed, 28 Oct 2015, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > > >> On 26.10.2015 23:34, Lee Jones wrote: > >>> On Mon, 26 Oct 2015, Alim Akhtar wrote: > >>> > >>>> From: Thomas Abraham <thomas...@samsung.com> > >>>> > >>>> Add support for S2MPS15 PMIC which is similar to S2MPS11 PMIC. The > >>>> S2MPS15 > >>>> PMIC supports 27 LDO regulators, 10 buck regulators, RTC, three 32.768KHz > >>>> clock outputs and battery charger. This patch adds initial support for > >>>> LDO and buck regulators of S2MPS15 device. > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Abraham <thomas...@samsung.com> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Alim Akhtar <alim.akh...@samsung.com> > >>>> [Alim: Added s2mps15_devs like rtc and clk and related changes] > >>>> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlow...@samsung.com> > >>>> --- > >>>> drivers/mfd/sec-core.c | 31 +++++++ > >>>> drivers/mfd/sec-irq.c | 8 ++ > >>>> include/linux/mfd/samsung/core.h | 1 + > >>>> include/linux/mfd/samsung/s2mps15.h | 158 > >>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >>>> 4 files changed, 198 insertions(+) > >>>> create mode 100644 include/linux/mfd/samsung/s2mps15.h > >>> > >>> I replied to the previous set and won't be reviewing this one until > >>> all of the open points are solved. > >> > >> The naming and compatibles used by the driver are confusing but how it > >> was at beginning. Beside the confusion, the names are correct: > >> > >> 1. Main mfd driver: > >> - compatible: samsung,s2mps1*-pmic > >> - driver name: sec_pmic > >> > >> 2. Regulator driver: > >> - no compatible (because it always searches for "regulators" subnode of > >> its parent... that is the convention/legacy behaviour) > >> - driver name: s2mps1*-pmic > >> > >> I hope that explains your concerns. > > > > It explains *why*, but doesn't ease my concerns in any way. > > > > Unfortunately I've only just realised the disparity we have between > > MFD and the Regulator subsystem, which is annoying because it's now > > almost impossible to rectify. > > > > We should have taken one of two views. Either a) The MFD is the PMIC > > device which encompasses regulator control. In which case the MFD > > and it's corresponding compatible string would be named *-pmic and the > > regulator driver would be called *-regulator. Or b) The MFD could be > > considered a normal MFD and be named after the model number, then the > > regulator 'could' be named *-pmic. > > > > However, with reference to b), how much other Power Management does > > the regulator driver do besides control regulators? I suspect not > > much. Therefore my preference would be for a). My second choice > > would be a mixuture of the two where nothing gets named *-pmic. The > > last option on my list would be the current situation where we seem to > > be calling both the MFD (PMIC) itself and the Regulator driver > > *-pmic, which is not good. > > Starting from the description of device-family. This is called "Power > Management IC" but it is rather a "Power Deliver/Distribute IC". There > isn't any logic inside except enable/disable/configure/set low power > mode for regulators. > > However in the same time the IC comes (always) with: > - 32kHz clocks, > - RTC, > - backup battery charger (no driver for it), > - reset for SoC, > - shutdown on thermal alert (also no driver for this control). > > The solution a) seems fine to me. Make sense and it looks entirely > backward compatible - only driver names will be modified.
Perfect solution from my PoV. Thanks Krzysztof. -- Lee Jones Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/