Re: [PATCH v2 2/7] backlight: qcom-wled: Support ovp values for PMI8994

[barnabas.czeman@mainlining.org]

On 2026-01-09 16:42, barnabas.czeman@mainlining.org wrote:
> On 2026-01-09 14:33, Daniel Thompson wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 09, 2026 at 12:09:11PM +0100, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>>> On 1/9/26 7:36 AM, barnabas.czeman@mainlining.org wrote:
>>> > On 2026-01-08 12:28, Daniel Thompson wrote:
>>> >> On Thu, Jan 08, 2026 at 04:43:20AM +0100, Barnabás Czémán wrote:
>>> >>> WLED4 found in PMI8994 supports different ovp values.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Fixes: 6fc632d3e3e0 ("video: backlight: qcom-wled: Add PMI8994 compatible")
>>> >>> Reviewed-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@oss.qualcomm.com>
>>> >>> Signed-off-by: Barnabás Czémán <barnabas.czeman@mainlining.org>
>>> >>> ---
>>> >>>  drivers/video/backlight/qcom-wled.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>> >>>  1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>> >>>
>>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/video/backlight/qcom-wled.c b/drivers/video/backlight/qcom-wled.c
>>> >>> index a63bb42c8f8b..5decbd39b789 100644
>>> >>> --- a/drivers/video/backlight/qcom-wled.c
>>> >>> +++ b/drivers/video/backlight/qcom-wled.c
>>> >>> @@ -1244,6 +1244,15 @@ static const struct wled_var_cfg wled4_ovp_cfg = {
>>> >>>      .size = ARRAY_SIZE(wled4_ovp_values),
>>> >>>  };
>>> >>>
>>> >>> +static const u32 pmi8994_wled_ovp_values[] = {
>>> >>> +    31000, 29500, 19400, 17800,
>>> >>> +};
>>> >>> +
>>> >>> +static const struct wled_var_cfg pmi8994_wled_ovp_cfg = {
>>> >>> +    .values = pmi8994_wled_ovp_values,
>>> >>> +    .size = ARRAY_SIZE(pmi8994_wled_ovp_values),
>>> >>> +};
>>> >>> +
>>> >>
>>> >> Do these *have* to be named after one of the two PMICs that implement
>>> >> this OVP range.
>>> >>
>>> >> Would something like wled4_alternative_ovp_values[] (and the same
>>> >> throughout the patch) be more descriptive?
>>> > I don't know. I don't like the PMIC naming either but at least it
>>> > descriptive about wich PMIC is needing these values.
>> 
>> It's the descriptive but wrong element I dislike (pmi8994_wled_ovp_cfg
>> is used by pmi8550).
> No, pmi8950 is using pmi8994_wled_opts struct what is using 
> pmi8994_wled_ovp_cfg.
Maybe would be better move opts to compatible data.
>> 
>> I know these things crop up for "historical reasons" when is appears 
>> in
>> the same patchset I have to question the naming.
>> 
>> 
>>> > I think PMIC naming would be fine if compatibles what representing the
>>> > same configurations would be deprecated and used as a fallback compatbile
>>> > style.
>>> > I mean we could kept the first added compatible for a configuration.
>>> > Maybe they should be named diferently i don't know if WLEDs have subversion.
>>> 
>>> Every PMIC peripheral is versioned.
>>> 
>>> WLED has separate versioning for the digital and analog parts:
>>> 
>>> PMIC		ANA	DIG
>>> ---------------------------
>>> PMI8937		2.0	1.0 (also needs the quirk)
>>> PMI8950		2.0	1.0
>>> PMI8994		2.0	1.0
>>> PMI8996		2.1	1.0
>>> PMI8998		3.1	3.0
>>> PM660L		4.1	4.0
>>> 
>>> I don't know for sure if "PMIC4 with WLED ANA/DIG 3.x" a good
>>> discriminant though..
>> 
>> Peronally I'd prefer that to making them all use pmi8994 structures.
>> It's a much better link back to the docs (at least for those with the
>> power to read them ;-) ).
>> 
>> 
>> Daniel.