From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] regulator: qcom_spmi: Add support for PM8005 Date: Wed, 22 May 2019 15:28:37 +0100 Message-ID: <20190522142837.GE8582@sirena.org.uk> References: <20190521164932.14265-1-jeffrey.l.hugo@gmail.com> <20190521165315.14379-1-jeffrey.l.hugo@gmail.com> <20190521185054.GD16633@sirena.org.uk> <51caaee4-dfc9-5b5a-07c7-b1406c178ca3@codeaurora.org> <20190522110107.GB8582@sirena.org.uk> <4e5bdf77-3141-bff6-e5b9-a81a5c73b4e4@codeaurora.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="maH1Gajj2nflutpK" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4e5bdf77-3141-bff6-e5b9-a81a5c73b4e4@codeaurora.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Jeffrey Hugo Cc: Jeffrey Hugo , lgirdwood@gmail.com, agross@kernel.org, david.brown@linaro.org, bjorn.andersson@linaro.org, jcrouse@codeaurora.org, robh+dt@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org --maH1Gajj2nflutpK Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 08:16:38AM -0600, Jeffrey Hugo wrote: > On 5/22/2019 5:01 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > > On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 05:16:06PM -0600, Jeffrey Hugo wrote: > > > I'm open to suggestions. Apparently there are two register common register > > > schemes - the old one and the new one. PMIC designs after some random point > > > in time are all the new register scheme per the documentation I see. > > > As far as I an aware, the FT426 design is the first design to be added to > > > this driver to make use of the new scheme, but I expect more to be supported > > > in future, thus I'm reluctant to make these ft426 specific in the name. > > If there's a completely new register map why are these even in the same > > driver? > Its not completely new, its a derivative of the old scheme. Of the 104 > registers, approximately 5 have been modified, therefore the new scheme is > 95% compatible with the old one. Duplicating a 1883 line driver to handle a > change in 5% of the register space seems less than ideal. Particularly > considering your previous comments seem to indicate that you feel its pretty > trivial to handle the quirks associated with the changes in this driver. Ah, so it's not a completely new scheme but rather just a couple of registers that have changed. Sharing the driver is fine then. Ideally there would be some documentation from the vendor about this, a mention of IP revisions or some such. If not what the DT bindings do for names is use the first chip things were found in. --maH1Gajj2nflutpK Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAABCgAdFiEEreZoqmdXGLWf4p/qJNaLcl1Uh9AFAlzlXJUACgkQJNaLcl1U h9C+ZQf/TqQlF1ddY6Pa7ieCP0TCY5fWm5JoIZlTG/2Rm+N9ucuHg0yY69ufYHfx 2/um2JJBej0FYI2l20kRcV+D5Mgzi9fr7bM2HHWc0eMUpDcSgxAsPE5yMPwTELwt u59c+J7YyFL4I0ZZsLvFl/tLvf+eEAOgluj/wjMHXbE6rjjwujGnz7MTljY50EQB +z/EfHzhJQj93txkYaEYmIdAUWLIqzgMlxYvfcvqU3/5af3FAyk43ytzT19MB3Ty +rC6IkooIfmgFJnRfCjbxu6igpsVl6vTGgRwL9UnLOz86RK4yhvrQ9zdlgYoWViK 4aIBU4bxP1MI3uscDoP+YyNoKjE7Yw== =yQnz -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --maH1Gajj2nflutpK--