From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: lee.jones@linaro.org (Lee Jones) Date: Fri, 23 May 2014 11:03:39 +0100 Subject: [RFC PATCH 1/3] mfd: AXP22x: add support for APX221 PMIC In-Reply-To: <537EF4A6.2050405@free-electrons.com> References: <1400176305-22737-1-git-send-email-boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com> <1400176305-22737-2-git-send-email-boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com> <20140519172817.GE20435@lee--X1> <537A4324.4060905@free-electrons.com> <537B06A0.3040706@redhat.com> <20140520074810.GE20874@lee--X1> <537EF4A6.2050405@free-electrons.com> Message-ID: <20140523100339.GO19747@lee--X1> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org > >>>>> This patch introduces preliminary support for the X-Powers AXP221 PMIC. > >>>>> The AXP221 is typically used on boards using Allwinner's A31 SoC. > >>>>> > >>>>> At the moment, this driver only exposes regulator devices, but other > >>>>> subdevices. > >>>>> > >>>>> Signed-off-by: Boris BREZILLON > >>>>> --- > >>>>> drivers/mfd/Kconfig | 12 +++ > >>>>> drivers/mfd/Makefile | 1 + > >>>>> drivers/mfd/axp22x.c | 237 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >>>>> include/linux/mfd/axp22x.h | 149 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >>>>> 4 files changed, 399 insertions(+) > >>>>> create mode 100644 drivers/mfd/axp22x.c > >>>>> create mode 100644 include/linux/mfd/axp22x.h > >>>> Not a chance. > >>>> > >>>> Farrrr, too much common code with axp20x.c - please merge into one file. > >>>> > >>> This was one of the questions I asked in my cover letter (could you take > >>> a look at it and tell me what's your prefered solution ?) ;-). > >>> > >>> I first tried to reuse the axp20x drivers, but ended up copying almost > >>> all definitions, hence I decided to first do a different driver and ask > >>> for advices. > >> I've just taken a good look at this (I'm planning on doing an axp152 driver > >> myself), and it seems that using a single mfd driver for the 20x and 221 should > >> be quite feasible: > >> > >> - axp20x.h would get some new register defines for registers which are > >> different (or unique) to the 221 prefixed with aXP221 > >> - An axp20x_writeable_ranges would need > >> to be extended with a third range going from AXP221_BAT_CAP1 (0xe0) > >> to AXP221_BAT_LOW_THRESH (0xe6) > >> - axp20x_writeable_table would get .n_yes_ranges set to 2, and a new > >> apx22x_writeable_table would be introduced with n_yes_ranges set to 3. > >> - add a new axp221_supplies array > >> - add a new axp221_cells array > >> - and finally use the proper structs in axp20x_i2c_probe depending on the type > >> > >> Note that this means sharing ie the interrupt table, which is ok since they > >> are the same, except that the 221 has a couple of interrupts missing, but > >> the ones which are shared are all at the same place. > > Exactly. As .probe() is identical, you only require some device > > matching and some extra structs where the data actually differs > > between devices. > > > > I think you've applied this patch on your for-next tree by mistake. > As stated above, this driver should be merged with the axp20x one. You're right, I added it for testing, but removed it soon after. I've now re-pushed the branch, so it should be gone now. -- Lee Jones Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead Linaro.org ? Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog