From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marek Vasut Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: porter: Add missing PMIC nodes Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2018 12:15:39 +0100 Message-ID: <0a1597df-a9ba-c178-3af2-042cb3e31de4@gmail.com> References: <20180217020756.21474-1-marek.vasut+renesas@gmail.com> <2860322f-89b9-32aa-37bc-4fa4a52c1837@gmail.com> <20180226105510.azlj56eohhu5wu3n@verge.net.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20180226105510.azlj56eohhu5wu3n@verge.net.au> Content-Language: en-US List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=m.gmane.org@lists.infradead.org To: Simon Horman Cc: "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" , Kuninori Morimoto , Geert Uytterhoeven , Linux-Renesas , Wolfram Sang , Geert Uytterhoeven , Steve Twiss , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Marek Vasut List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 02/26/2018 11:55 AM, Simon Horman wrote: > On Sat, Feb 24, 2018 at 11:11:31PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote: >> On 02/18/2018 04:07 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: >>> Hi Marek, >> >> Hi, >> >>> CC Steve Twiss >>> >>> On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 3:07 AM, Marek Vasut wrote: >>>> Add PMIC nodes to Porter and connect CPU DVFS supply. There is >>>> one DA9063 and one DA9210 on Porter, the only difference from >>>> the other boards is that DA9063 is at I2C address 0x5a rather >>>> than 0x58 . >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut >>> >>> Thanks for your patch! >>> >>>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/r8a7791-porter.dts >>>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/r8a7791-porter.dts >>>> @@ -354,10 +354,47 @@ >>>> clock-frequency = <400000>; >>>> }; >>>> >>>> +&i2c6 { >>>> + status = "okay"; >>>> + clock-frequency = <100000>; >>>> + >>>> + pmic@5a { >>>> + compatible = "dlg,da9063"; >>> >>> Does it matter that this is a DA9063L ("Variant 6B")? >>> Do we need a new compatible value, or can this be detected at runtime? >> >> The driver detects it >> >> da9063 6-005a: Device detected (chip-ID: 0x61, var-ID: 0x63) >> >> Comparing the datasheets makes it obvious that 9063L is just a cut-down >> version of 9063, with less LDOs and one less ADC. So I think we should >> have extra compatible and have the driver restrict which LDOs can be >> used with this smaller PMIC. > > Thanks, and sorry to ping yo about this while you were in transit. > > It sounds like this patch should be updated. > Accordingly I'm marking it as "Changes Requested". Correct -- Best regards, Marek Vasut