From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lee Jones Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] mfd: bcm590xx: add support for second i2c slave address space Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2014 10:29:48 +0100 Message-ID: <20140428092947.GN6264@lee--X1> References: <1397501428-8857-1-git-send-email-mporter@linaro.org> <1397501428-8857-3-git-send-email-mporter@linaro.org> <20140416110603.GA19671@lee--X1> <20140416213141.GD12304@sirena.org.uk> <20140417065753.GC28725@lee--X1> <20140417222616.GK23695@beef> <20140422082139.GF17657@lee--X1> <20140423220126.GC4164@beef> <20140423220500.GA1127@beef> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140423220500.GA1127@beef> Sender: devicetree-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Matt Porter Cc: Mark Brown , Devicetree List , Samuel Ortiz , Liam Girdwood , Tim Kryger , Markus Mayer , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux ARM Kernel List List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org > > > > > > > s/regmap/Regmap > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > It's consistently written regmap in all the documentation a= nd so on :) > > > > >=20 > > > > > Furry muff; but the comments still stand for the acronyms. > > > > >=20 > > > > > > > addmap{0,1} doesn't quite sit right with me. > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > > REVISIT: Ah, it's address-map, rather than add map. Okay,= not as bad > > > > > > > as I first thought, but still, is there a better naming c= onvention you > > > > > > > could use? > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > addrmap or something? > > > > >=20 > > > > > Right, that was what I was thinking. However, I prefer someth= ing along > > > > > the lines of 'i2c' and 'i2c_sec' or 'client' and 'client_slv'= etc. > > > >=20 > > > > FWIW, the reason it's addmap{0,1} is that the datasheet has doc= uments > > > > ADDMAP=3D0 and the first bank of registers and ADDMAP=3D1 as th= e second bank > > > > of registers. I adopted that to match the docs for the part. > > > >=20 > > > > I guess we could do i2c and i2c_sec, I'll just have to put a co= mment > > > > correlating it to the h/w. Calling it 'slv' implies something e= lse > > > > so we should avoid that here. The notion of a "secondary" i2c d= evice > > > > is completely a Linux I2C subsystem fabrication which wouldn't = exist > > > > if it allowed multiple slave addresses per device. From a h/w > > > > perspective there is really no primary and secondary relationsh= ip. > > > >=20 > > > > I'm fine with i2c/i2c_sec or addrmap0/1 and I will just comment= to > > > > correlate with the datasheet..pick one. > > >=20 > > > Let's stick method fabricated by the I2C subsystem. It may seem s= trange > > > from a h/w perspective, but it is the way we (you) have coded it,= as > > > the first parameter of i2c_new_dummy() is the 'managing' (primary= , > > > parent, master, whatever) device, so '_sec' would suit as an > > > identifying appendage for the resultant device. > >=20 > > That works, I'll also switch to addrmap_[pri|sec] which touches the > > regulator driver as well. That will keep the relationship between = device > > and regmap clear. >=20 > Misspoke...I'm switching regmap[0|1] to regmap_[pri|sec] to keep that > synced with i2c_[pri|sec] Sounds good, thanks Matt. --=20 Lee Jones Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead Linaro.org =E2=94=82 Open source software for ARM SoCs =46ollow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" i= n the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html