From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1A5C01F8EFF; Tue, 19 Aug 2025 02:01:10 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1755568872; cv=none; b=ug+XxVhUv2vG3mI4HmLXkZl9G2CWC5azEH8iy/EnoCFgnEYBti6SoVFw3R51fU7RAdDjvGRIPAeq7XqROsO872emZ7XI7XzAH0yklYlxVVfwIwd8eZvqvVOAXRcPJPdMbK8BWTRQFSS9kjq+Tt+H7N8mzEi8y2HaqsF0AMPn/3k= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1755568872; c=relaxed/simple; bh=PUkNlXKrmXY1CLgusGbdGf67x2cphnPK0xcltNm/Pnw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=bejg6/KpmleRtseH9+YKf15YpcXL7doQ188qoChLbeAt2DcaC7FLhXYf59NyxgPYzh6P6AooTx59HAKWJp59Jb4ni42VQxsP0RBIgFNDclonmZIwYVJ9gDkpd0YinRshUCmNAJOXlSPTjRx4EJNHnfUsRVc31VW1zwOJjw7+j14= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=V8gM6zTp; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="V8gM6zTp" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8513EC4CEEB; Tue, 19 Aug 2025 02:01:10 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1755568870; bh=PUkNlXKrmXY1CLgusGbdGf67x2cphnPK0xcltNm/Pnw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=V8gM6zTpI4jGfutyv8uTMMwZ9+TjZKeLUvOgai/D4/vXbmo5eW34untPXahra9Lva 61N/2Tni0GlkAenRGHPy16B8qZmez5XDY8jo+j25YrJAaPMDQCgI8q0GwFT7vW3Us2 woOeg208mpKHhvzkOcBV8lYXW2aFqHGUg6eX7/OPePeWgim3tsazSCdxeFtud+EinT SELPM+R3nhc79KjMSj5ALnQlUOQUHLfqsyUfZnjQIAWMO0R0eIYdjrso4zvwzwSbg7 BUDlwef1VRh/vl7zzCXivNOVz4ZGxCppETE2YndWki/Cb5Ft1cL3iULdG+4thSV+eO Fy3fgzx8fw3UA== Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2025 22:01:09 -0400 From: Sasha Levin To: Michael Walle Cc: patches@lists.linux.dev, stable@vger.kernel.org, Lee Jones Subject: Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL 6.12 27/69] mfd: tps6594: Add TI TPS652G1 support Message-ID: References: <20250804003119.3620476-1-sashal@kernel.org> <20250804003119.3620476-27-sashal@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: patches@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Mon, Aug 18, 2025 at 08:34:03AM +0200, Michael Walle wrote: >Hi Sasha, > >On Mon Aug 4, 2025 at 2:30 AM CEST, Sasha Levin wrote: >> From: Michael Walle >> >> [ 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 >> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250613114518.1772109-2-mwalle@kernel.org >> Signed-off-by: Lee Jones >> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin >> --- >> >> 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. Yeah, it doesn't make sense to keep it in. I'll drop it. Thanks! -- Thanks, Sasha