Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: qcom: pm7250b: make SID configurable

["Luca Weiss" <luca.weiss@fairphone.com>]

On Wed May 10, 2023 at 10:07 AM CEST, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Wed, 10 May 2023 at 09:55, Krzysztof Kozlowski
> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
> >
> > On 10/05/2023 08:47, Luca Weiss wrote:
> > > Hi Krzysztof,
> > >
> > > On Fri Apr 7, 2023 at 10:27 AM CEST, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > >> On 07/04/2023 09:45, Luca Weiss wrote:
> > >>> Like other Qualcomm PMICs the PM7250B can be used on different addresses
> > >>> on the SPMI bus. Use similar defines like the PMK8350 to make this
> > >>> possible.
> > >>>
> > >>> Signed-off-by: Luca Weiss <luca.weiss@fairphone.com>
> > >>> ---
> > >>>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm7250b.dtsi | 23 ++++++++++++++++-------
> > >>>  1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> > >>>
> > >>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm7250b.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm7250b.dtsi
> > >>> index daa6f1d30efa..eeb476edc79a 100644
> > >>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm7250b.dtsi
> > >>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm7250b.dtsi
> > >>> @@ -7,6 +7,15 @@
> > >>>  #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/irq.h>
> > >>>  #include <dt-bindings/spmi/spmi.h>
> > >>>
> > >>> +/* This PMIC can be configured to be at different SIDs */
> > >>> +#ifndef PM7250B_SID
> > >>> +   #define PM7250B_SID 2
> > >>
> > >> Drop indentation, although anyway I am against this. Please don't bring
> > >> new patterns of this at least till we settle previous discussion.
> > >>
> > >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/46658cbb-fff5-e98b-fdad-88fa683a9c75@linaro.org/
> > >
> > > What's the outcome of the discussion? For this PMIC it's totally enough
> > > to have the SID configurable like in this patch, I don't think this PMIC
> > > will be included twice in a board - at least I'm not aware of such a
> > > configuration.
> >
> > We did not reach consensus and I still disagree with complex macros or
> > macros depending on order of inclusion.
>
> I still think we should find a way to parametrise PMIC dtsi, however I
> agree with Krzysztof that complex CPP is not a way to go.

What about the macro already used in-tree and proposed with this patch?
I wouldn't say this is a "complex macro" since it's just a single number
being replaced in a few places.

Could we get this in now, and if we find a new & better way in the
future we can adjust all the dtsi upstream?