Hi Sasha,

On Mon Aug 4, 2025 at 2:30 AM CEST, Sasha Levin wrote:
> From: Michael Walle <mwalle@kernel.org>
>
> [ Upstream commit 626bb0a45584d544d84eab909795ccb355062bcc ]
>
> The TPS652G1 is a stripped down version of the TPS65224. From a software
> point of view, it lacks any voltage monitoring, the watchdog, the ESM
> and the ADC.
>
> Signed-off-by: Michael Walle <mwalle@kernel.org>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250613114518.1772109-2-mwalle@kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
> ---
>
> LLM Generated explanations, may be completely bogus:
>
> **YES**
>
> This commit should be backported to stable kernel trees for the
> following reasons:
>
> 1. **Hardware Enablement (Device ID Addition)**: This patch adds support
>    for a new PMIC variant (TPS652G1) by adding its device ID and
>    configuration. According to stable kernel rules, patches that "just
>    add a device ID" are explicitly allowed for stable backporting.
>
> 2. **Self-Contained Changes**: The modifications are isolated to adding
>    support for the new device without altering existing functionality:
>    - Adds `TPS652G1` to the `enum pmic_id`
>    - Adds TPS652G1-specific MFD cells configuration
>    - Adds device-specific IRQ mappings (subset of TPS65224 IRQs)
>    - Adds compatible strings "ti,tps652g1" to I2C and SPI device tables
>    - Properly handles the stripped-down nature of TPS652G1 (no RTC, ADC,
>      watchdog, ESM)
>
> 3. **Low Risk**: The changes follow the existing driver pattern and only
>    add conditional paths for the new device:
>   ```c
>   if (tps->chip_id == TPS65224 || tps->chip_id == TPS652G1)
>   ```
>   This ensures existing device support remains unaffected.
>
> 4. **User Benefit**: Without this patch, users with TPS652G1 hardware
>    cannot use their devices on stable kernels. This directly impacts
>    hardware functionality for affected users.
>
> 5. **Proper Implementation**: The patch correctly handles the TPS652G1
>    as a feature-reduced variant of TPS65224, sharing the same register
>    layout and CRC handling while properly excluding unsupported
>    features.
>
> The patch is relatively small, follows established driver patterns, and
> enables essential hardware support without introducing architectural
> changes or new features beyond device enablement.

While this is correct, the MFD patch on it's own is rather useless,
as the individual driver implementations are missing. See
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250703113153.2447110-1-mwalle@kernel.org/

I don't care too much, I just want to point out, that just having
this patch might be misleading regarding the support of this PMIC.

-michael