From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Message-id: <56319E36.1000700@samsung.com> Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2015 09:49:02 +0530 From: Alim Akhtar MIME-version: 1.0 To: Lee Jones , Krzysztof Kozlowski Cc: k.kozlowski.k@gmail.com, broonie@kernel.org, mturquette@baylibre.com, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, rtc-linux@googlegroups.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Abraham Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/5] mfd: sec: Add support for S2MPS15 PMIC References: <1445863883-5187-1-git-send-email-alim.akhtar@samsung.com> <1445863883-5187-3-git-send-email-alim.akhtar@samsung.com> <20151026143411.GL597@x1> <563021AF.6030100@samsung.com> <20151028084609.GG5828@x1> <5630D12C.2030008@samsung.com> <20151028135149.GF4058@x1> In-reply-to: <20151028135149.GF4058@x1> Content-type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed List-ID: On 10/28/2015 07:21 PM, Lee Jones wrote: > On Wed, 28 Oct 2015, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >> W dniu 28.10.2015 o 17:46, Lee Jones pisze: >>> On Wed, 28 Oct 2015, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>> >>>> On 26.10.2015 23:34, Lee Jones wrote: >>>>> On Mon, 26 Oct 2015, Alim Akhtar wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> From: Thomas Abraham >>>>>> >>>>>> Add support for S2MPS15 PMIC which is similar to S2MPS11 PMIC. The S2MPS15 >>>>>> PMIC supports 27 LDO regulators, 10 buck regulators, RTC, three 32.768KHz >>>>>> clock outputs and battery charger. This patch adds initial support for >>>>>> LDO and buck regulators of S2MPS15 device. >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Abraham >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Alim Akhtar >>>>>> [Alim: Added s2mps15_devs like rtc and clk and related changes] >>>>>> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski >>>>>> --- >>>>>> drivers/mfd/sec-core.c | 31 +++++++ >>>>>> drivers/mfd/sec-irq.c | 8 ++ >>>>>> include/linux/mfd/samsung/core.h | 1 + >>>>>> include/linux/mfd/samsung/s2mps15.h | 158 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>>>> 4 files changed, 198 insertions(+) >>>>>> create mode 100644 include/linux/mfd/samsung/s2mps15.h >>>>> >>>>> I replied to the previous set and won't be reviewing this one until >>>>> all of the open points are solved. >>>> >>>> The naming and compatibles used by the driver are confusing but how it >>>> was at beginning. Beside the confusion, the names are correct: >>>> >>>> 1. Main mfd driver: >>>> - compatible: samsung,s2mps1*-pmic >>>> - driver name: sec_pmic >>>> >>>> 2. Regulator driver: >>>> - no compatible (because it always searches for "regulators" subnode of >>>> its parent... that is the convention/legacy behaviour) >>>> - driver name: s2mps1*-pmic >>>> >>>> I hope that explains your concerns. >>> >>> It explains *why*, but doesn't ease my concerns in any way. >>> >>> Unfortunately I've only just realised the disparity we have between >>> MFD and the Regulator subsystem, which is annoying because it's now >>> almost impossible to rectify. >>> >>> We should have taken one of two views. Either a) The MFD is the PMIC >>> device which encompasses regulator control. In which case the MFD >>> and it's corresponding compatible string would be named *-pmic and the >>> regulator driver would be called *-regulator. Or b) The MFD could be >>> considered a normal MFD and be named after the model number, then the >>> regulator 'could' be named *-pmic. >>> >>> However, with reference to b), how much other Power Management does >>> the regulator driver do besides control regulators? I suspect not >>> much. Therefore my preference would be for a). My second choice >>> would be a mixuture of the two where nothing gets named *-pmic. The >>> last option on my list would be the current situation where we seem to >>> be calling both the MFD (PMIC) itself and the Regulator driver >>> *-pmic, which is not good. >> >> Starting from the description of device-family. This is called "Power >> Management IC" but it is rather a "Power Deliver/Distribute IC". There >> isn't any logic inside except enable/disable/configure/set low power >> mode for regulators. >> >> However in the same time the IC comes (always) with: >> - 32kHz clocks, >> - RTC, >> - backup battery charger (no driver for it), >> - reset for SoC, >> - shutdown on thermal alert (also no driver for this control). >> >> The solution a) seems fine to me. Make sense and it looks entirely >> backward compatible - only driver names will be modified. > > Perfect solution from my PoV. > > Thanks Krzysztof. > Thanks Jones/Krzysztof as always. Will update the patches.