From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B05F664C; Mon, 18 Apr 2022 03:23:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D9AF0C385A4; Mon, 18 Apr 2022 03:23:29 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1650252211; bh=FdV0BbbkJT2rE9g8AmJful8pYq6qPpf0N6gWli0rXVw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=keo2VlSV0vn+iBnJt2gOGe+pMclPf4TSrg0jKCdF4yjOZ/7ZHLghlzfHMOJ1P9JqB MqJyGq+RUhTrOWiHBLSrscGeorGKl0Ohif9PqOHXK7ZPXti5LLy127EaivWehuWKag E3Fw2td/Bx78EkjMXBoWFafxjefJ8pfhDv5qiFf4730h9BXq8Uhf1dFn1l+nDSf5M9 IZ5KrwnfYSOvJvZ0ebJnQavcxVK74Gz4Go3dFbIlPgEUcIe53k+E8nwceaxzlmXA67 UY+vNovVnbcLWc4yWJKzN8+7fJM2Ly1jUD/lq6L1vwce1dG8SM9ILksZz4gxXRkIgx fXH5/1RykWigw== Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2022 11:23:27 +0800 From: Tzung-Bi Shih To: Stephen Boyd Cc: Benson Leung , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, patches@lists.linux.dev, Lee Jones , Daisuke Nojiri , Guenter Roeck , chrome-platform@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] platform/chrome: cros_ec_proto: Add peripheral charger count API Message-ID: References: <20220415003253.1973106-1-swboyd@chromium.org> <20220415003253.1973106-2-swboyd@chromium.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: chrome-platform@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20220415003253.1973106-2-swboyd@chromium.org> On Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 05:32:51PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote: > Add a peripheral charger count API similar to the one implemented in the > ChromeOS PCHG driver so we can use it to decide whether or not to > register the PCHG device in the cros_ec MFD driver. > > Cc: Lee Jones > Cc: Daisuke Nojiri > Cc: Benson Leung > Cc: Guenter Roeck > Cc: > Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd With a minor comment about the naming, Reviewed-by: Tzung-Bi Shih > diff --git a/include/linux/platform_data/cros_ec_proto.h b/include/linux/platform_data/cros_ec_proto.h > index df3c78c92ca2..8f5781bc2d7a 100644 > --- a/include/linux/platform_data/cros_ec_proto.h > +++ b/include/linux/platform_data/cros_ec_proto.h > @@ -230,6 +230,7 @@ u32 cros_ec_get_host_event(struct cros_ec_device *ec_dev); > bool cros_ec_check_features(struct cros_ec_dev *ec, int feature); > > int cros_ec_get_sensor_count(struct cros_ec_dev *ec); > +unsigned int cros_ec_pchg_port_count(struct cros_ec_dev *ec); I wonder if "cros_ec_get_pchg_port_count" would be a better name for the API.