From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: blogic@openwrt.org (John Crispin) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 15:02:55 +0100 Subject: [PATCH V2 2/2] regulator: mt6323: Add support for MT6323 regulator In-Reply-To: References: <1453718405-40815-1-git-send-email-blogic@openwrt.org> <1453718405-40815-2-git-send-email-blogic@openwrt.org> <56A612E2.1010509@openwrt.org> <20160125123538.GO6588@sirena.org.uk> <56A61F78.6070703@openwrt.org> <56A6271E.8060607@openwrt.org> Message-ID: <56A62B0F.2090707@openwrt.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 25/01/2016 15:01, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: > Hello John, > > On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 10:46 AM, John Crispin wrote: >> >> >> On 25/01/2016 14:25, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: >>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 10:19 AM, Javier Martinez Canillas >>> wrote: >>> >>> [snip] >>> >>>> >>>> In fact, the kernel is currently not matching the compatible, it is >>>> only matching because you provided a .of_compatible is provided in the >>>> mfd_cell. >>>> >>> >>> Sorry my English was a bit off in this paragraph... >>> >>> I tried to say that OF does not traverse MFD sub-devices and lookups a >>> device driver that matches the compatible automatically since a MFD >>> device is not a bus. Currently it is only trying to match a compatible >>> string because the mfd_cell has a .of_compatible set so an of_node is >>> assigned on mfd_add_device(). >>> >>> But it is failing to match because no OF device table is provided and >>> the platform bus match callback is falling back to the driver .name to >>> match so the compatible is not really used as Mark said. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Javier >>> >> >> Hi, >> >> just so i am sure to have understood properly. i just need to drop the >> compatible string from [1/2] and resend. if this is the case i will fix >> the mt6397 binding doc while at it. >> > > And you will also need to remove the .of_compatible = > "mediatek,mt6323-regulator" from patch "[PATCH V2 4/4] mfd: mediatek: > add MT6323 support to MT6397 driver" since otherwise an > MODALIAS=of:foo will be reported instead of an MODALIAS=platform:foo > > But if I were you, I would keep the MFD driver and DT binding as they > are and provide a .id_table and .of_match_table to the mt6323 > regulator platform driver. > > I'll write patches for the mt6397 regulator driver adding those tables > since it has the same issue and you can see what I mean. > >> John > > Best regards, > Javier > Hi Javier, fine i'll do that then. thanks for the elaborate explanation. John