Re: [PATCH 0/2] mfd: qcom-pm8008: support PMICs with no interrupt line

[Oleg Keri <okerixx@gmail.com>]

Please drop this series.

It duplicates, as a strict subset, work that was already on the list a day
before I posted:

  [v2,3/6] dt-bindings: mfd: pm8008: Add PM8010 I2C support
  [v2,5/6] mfd: qcom-pm8008: Add support for PM8010 PMIC
  https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260907-glymur_camss-v2-0-75f7982dc983@oss.qualcomm.com/

Nihal's 3/6 relaxes the same required: entries mine does and more, and adds
the qcom,pm8010-i2c compatible; his 5/6 already carries the no-interrupt
path my 2/2 was adding:

  static const struct mfd_cell pm8008_no_irq_cells[] = {
          MFD_CELL_NAME("pm8008-regulator"),
  };

on top of a PM8010 IRQ chip, match data and a pm8010-regulator cell. There
is nothing in my series that his does not do better. My apologies for the
noise - I should have searched the list before posting.

Nihal, if it is useful: the Lenovo Yoga Slim 7x Gen 11 (glymur, DMI 83QR)
has a PM8010 whose INT pin is genuinely not routed on the board, so it
exercises your no-IRQ path rather than being a DT omission. I have been
running an equivalent no-IRQ path there since 2026-08-25 - the LDOs
register and the OV08X40 works - and I am happy to test your series on it
and send a Tested-by once I have actually run it.

Your 6/6 also shows that describing a PM8010 as "qcom,pm8008", which is
what I do today, silently programs the wrong voltage ranges. On that board
the sensor takes dovdd from ldo4 at 1.8 V, and:

  pm8008_pldo_ranges    1504000 + 8000 * n   ->  1.8 V is selector 37
  pm8010_pldo_lv_ranges 1800000 + 200000 * n ->  1.8 V is selector 0

so the same regulator-min/max-microvolt lands on a completely different
register value depending on which compatible the node carries. ldo3 and
ldo6 have the same split. ldo2 and ldo7 happen to map identically because
the nldo and pldo ranges share a base and step and differ only in their
upper bound.

The camera works on my board today despite this, which I would treat as
luck rather than evidence that it is harmless. It does mean your series
fixes a latent bug for boards already describing a PM8010 as qcom,pm8008,
not merely adding a new compatible - worth a line in 6/6 if you respin,
since those boards need the DT change and the driver change together.