Re: [PATCH v4 4/5] mfd: rn5t618: add more subdevices

[Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>]

On Mon, 16 Dec 2019, Andreas Kemnade wrote:

> On Mon, 16 Dec 2019 15:31:06 +0000
> Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 11 Dec 2019, Andreas Kemnade wrote:
> > 
> > > The RC5T619 has a RTC which is missing in the
> > > RN5T618. Add it as subdevice to prepare for their implementation
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Andreas Kemnade <andreas@kemnade.info>
> > > ---
> > > Changes in v3:
> > > - alignment cleanup
> > >  drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c | 16 ++++++++++++++--
> > >  1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c b/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c
> > > index d78eb29b94a4..18d56a732b20 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c
> > > @@ -22,6 +22,12 @@ static const struct mfd_cell rn5t618_cells[] = {
> > >  	{ .name = "rn5t618-wdt" },
> > >  };
> > >  
> > > +static const struct mfd_cell rc5t619_cells[] = {
> > > +	{ .name = "rn5t618-regulator" },
> > > +	{ .name = "rc5t619-rtc" },
> > > +	{ .name = "rn5t618-wdt" },
> > > +};
> > > +
> > >  static bool rn5t618_volatile_reg(struct device *dev, unsigned int reg)
> > >  {
> > >  	switch (reg) {
> > > @@ -173,8 +179,14 @@ static int rn5t618_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *i2c,
> > >  		return ret;
> > >  	}
> > >  
> > > -	ret = devm_mfd_add_devices(&i2c->dev, -1, rn5t618_cells,
> > > -				   ARRAY_SIZE(rn5t618_cells), NULL, 0, NULL);
> > > +	if (priv->variant == RC5T619)
> > > +		ret = devm_mfd_add_devices(&i2c->dev, -1, rc5t619_cells,  
> > 
> > Ref: The "-1", please use this as an opportunity to use the defines.
> > 
> > > +					   ARRAY_SIZE(rc5t619_cells),
> > > +					   NULL, 0, NULL);
> > > +	else  
> > 
> > Are you sure it's not possible for 'variant' to be an unsupported
> > device?
> > 
> Well, does it change the behavior for devices other than the rc5t619?
> I do not think so. If the mfd driver is bound to unsupported devices,
> rn5t618_of_match is wrong.

Right, and can you catch that?

> Or do you want separate cell arrays for each of the three variant now to
> ease future extensions?

No need for that, thank you.

-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
Linaro Services Technical Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog