From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lee Jones Subject: Re: [PATCH V10 2/6] mfd: max77620: add core driver for MAX77620/MAX20024 Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2016 08:25:59 +0100 Message-ID: <20160428072559.GK4892@dell> References: <1459348188-11726-1-git-send-email-ldewangan@nvidia.com> <1459348188-11726-3-git-send-email-ldewangan@nvidia.com> <20160427151947.GD4892@dell> <572104AA.7080500@nvidia.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <572104AA.7080500@nvidia.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Laxman Dewangan Cc: linus.walleij@linaro.org, robh+dt@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com, gnurou@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk, swarren@nvidia.com, treding@nvidia.com, Mallikarjun Kasoju List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 27 Apr 2016, Laxman Dewangan wrote: >=20 > On Wednesday 27 April 2016 08:49 PM, Lee Jones wrote: > >On Wed, 30 Mar 2016, Laxman Dewangan wrote: > > > >>+#define MAX77620_MFD_CELL_RES(_name, _res) \ > >>+ { \ > >>+ .name =3D (_name), \ > >>+ .resources =3D (_res), \ > >>+ .num_resources =3D ARRAY_SIZE((_res)), \ > >>+ } > >I'm *still* not accepting this. > > > >>+ > >>+static struct mfd_cell max20024_children[] =3D { > >>+ MAX77620_MFD_CELL_NAME("max20024-pinctrl"), > >>+ MAX77620_MFD_CELL_RES("max20024-gpio", gpio_resources), > >>+ MAX77620_MFD_CELL_NAME("max20024-pmic"), > >>+ MAX77620_MFD_CELL_RES("max77620-rtc", rtc_resources), > >>+ MAX77620_MFD_CELL_RES("max20024-power", power_resources), > >>+ MAX77620_MFD_CELL_NAME("max20024-watchdog"), > >>+ MAX77620_MFD_CELL_NAME("max20024-clock"), > >>+}; > >If you want this submission to be accepted this cycle, you're going = to > >have to convert this to the traditional way of defining MFD children= =2E >=20 > Yaah, I want to have this in current cycle. > Will it be fine as follows? (To have quick agreement) >=20 > static const struct mfd_cell max77620_children[] =3D { > { > .name =3D "max77620-pinctrl", > }, { > .name =3D "max77620-gpio", > .resource =3D gpio_resources, > .num_resources =3D ARRAY_SIZE(gpio_resources), > }, { > /* and so on */ > }, > }; Yes. Although, if there are no run-time ordering dependencies, I usually like to a) have the one line entries on one line i.e. { .name =3D "max77620-pinctrl" } =2E.. and b) for all the one line entries to be grouped together and the multi line ones grouped together as well. > > > >>+ if (x >=3D tperiod) > >>+ return i; > >>+ } > >>+ > >>+ return i; > >>+} > >>+ > >>+static int max77620_config_fps(struct max77620_chip *chip, > >>+ struct device_node *fps_np) > >Lots of mention of 'FPS' here, but noting to so what that is? > > > >What does FPS stand for and what does the FPS do? >=20 > FPS is Flexible Power Sequence. It is explained in DT binding doc. >=20 > However, I will document the function to make it more clear in next > revision. >=20 --=20 Lee Jones Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead Linaro.org =E2=94=82 Open source software for ARM SoCs =46ollow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog