* Re: [PATCH 1/3] mfd: support 88pm80x in 80x driver [not found] ` <4FF174AA.3020001-eYqpPyKDWXRBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org> @ 2012-07-02 15:58 ` Arnd Bergmann [not found] ` <201207021558.51246.arnd-r2nGTMty4D4@public.gmane.org> 0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread From: Arnd Bergmann @ 2012-07-02 15:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Qiao Zhou Cc: Mark Brown, haojian.zhuang-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, Chao Xie, rpurdie-Fm38FmjxZ/leoWH0uzbU5w@public.gmane.org, sameo-VuQAYsv1563Yd54FQh9/CA@public.gmane.org, linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, Wilbur Wang, linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA On Monday 02 July 2012, Qiao Zhou wrote: > On 07/02/2012 06:12 PM, Mark Brown wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 02, 2012 at 06:09:57PM +0800, Qiao Zhou wrote: > >> On 07/02/2012 06:03 PM, Mark Brown wrote: > > > >>> What do you mean by pages? regmap has paging support which just maps > >>> everything into a single flat register map from the point of view of > >>> callers. > > > >> Mark, let me explain: the 88pm800 chip has three i2c address > >> internally, which we called different page instead. it confuses you > >> with the register page_read/write operation. there are registers in > >> each i2c address domain, and we need to use different i2c client to > >> access reg in different domain. such as some common regs are in the > >> page of i2c_addr = 0x30, and power related regs are in the page of > >> i2c_addr = 0x31, and gpadc related regs are in the page of 0x32. > > > > These aren't what people normally call pages, those are just separate > > I2C devices from a Linux point of view. > > > Mark, surely I'll pay attention to the terms used. thanks! > due to there separate I2C devices, does it make sense to export separate > r/w interface for them? do you have suggestion in such case? (adding the i2c mailing list to get more insight) I think in case of device tree based probing, it would be straightforward to represent 88pm800 as a single device with three addresses in the "reg" property, while the natural linux representation would be one regular i2c_client device with two dummies. Do we or should we have any infrastructure to deal with this? If this is a common scenario, we could probably let regmap handle it entirely internally and represent the i2c client with its dummies as a single regmap. Arnd ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <201207021558.51246.arnd-r2nGTMty4D4@public.gmane.org>]
* Re: [PATCH 1/3] mfd: support 88pm80x in 80x driver [not found] ` <201207021558.51246.arnd-r2nGTMty4D4@public.gmane.org> @ 2012-07-03 2:28 ` Qiao Zhou 0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread From: Qiao Zhou @ 2012-07-03 2:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Mark Brown, haojian.zhuang-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, Chao Xie, rpurdie-Fm38FmjxZ/leoWH0uzbU5w@public.gmane.org, sameo-VuQAYsv1563Yd54FQh9/CA@public.gmane.org, linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, Wilbur Wang, linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org On 07/02/2012 11:58 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Monday 02 July 2012, Qiao Zhou wrote: >> On 07/02/2012 06:12 PM, Mark Brown wrote: >>> On Mon, Jul 02, 2012 at 06:09:57PM +0800, Qiao Zhou wrote: >>>> On 07/02/2012 06:03 PM, Mark Brown wrote: >>> >>>>> What do you mean by pages? regmap has paging support which just maps >>>>> everything into a single flat register map from the point of view of >>>>> callers. >>> >>>> Mark, let me explain: the 88pm800 chip has three i2c address >>>> internally, which we called different page instead. it confuses you >>>> with the register page_read/write operation. there are registers in >>>> each i2c address domain, and we need to use different i2c client to >>>> access reg in different domain. such as some common regs are in the >>>> page of i2c_addr = 0x30, and power related regs are in the page of >>>> i2c_addr = 0x31, and gpadc related regs are in the page of 0x32. >>> >>> These aren't what people normally call pages, those are just separate >>> I2C devices from a Linux point of view. >>> >> Mark, surely I'll pay attention to the terms used. thanks! >> due to there separate I2C devices, does it make sense to export separate >> r/w interface for them? do you have suggestion in such case? > > (adding the i2c mailing list to get more insight) > > I think in case of device tree based probing, it would be straightforward > to represent 88pm800 as a single device with three addresses in the "reg" > property, while the natural linux representation would be one regular > i2c_client device with two dummies. Do we or should we have any > infrastructure to deal with this? > > If this is a common scenario, we could probably let regmap handle it > entirely internally and represent the i2c client with its dummies > as a single regmap. actually there are many drivers under mfd which have this common issue, which has i2c dummy devices, such as max77693.c, max8925-i2c.c, ab3100-core.c, max8997.c, max8998.c, s5m-core.c etc. some use regmap handle directly as param in exported r/w api, some add extra param to differentiate i2c dummy. it seems to be a common scenario. how do we handle the API in short term and long term? > > Arnd > -- Best Regards Qiao ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2012-07-03 2:28 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- [not found] <1340853214-5429-1-git-send-email-zhouqiao@marvell.com> [not found] ` <20120702101228.GD25093@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> [not found] ` <4FF174AA.3020001@marvell.com> [not found] ` <4FF174AA.3020001-eYqpPyKDWXRBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org> 2012-07-02 15:58 ` [PATCH 1/3] mfd: support 88pm80x in 80x driver Arnd Bergmann [not found] ` <201207021558.51246.arnd-r2nGTMty4D4@public.gmane.org> 2012-07-03 2:28 ` Qiao Zhou
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).