From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FF15C433EF for ; Sun, 17 Oct 2021 16:16:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11FBB61054 for ; Sun, 17 Oct 2021 16:16:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S242529AbhJQQS1 (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Oct 2021 12:18:27 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:34066 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S242290AbhJQQS0 (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Oct 2021 12:18:26 -0400 Received: from mail-pj1-x1035.google.com (mail-pj1-x1035.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1035]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8D21DC06161C; Sun, 17 Oct 2021 09:16:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pj1-x1035.google.com with SMTP id oa12-20020a17090b1bcc00b0019f715462a8so10844839pjb.3; Sun, 17 Oct 2021 09:16:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding; bh=42lYw5pCE0zNrU6J8q4nS26RrdDfNMoAQ5bEAgu6FyY=; b=huZFTc12hwErjEmV708pz9npHN0c/F6etjRVedvmqsQKIfhCkmlFr/cjlFh1pYdQur MkHCXy18LTVGvxN3QgI8rrVhko3WRr5cdHRINcbWqENXfqNctgLJTXnlGDxBbVuzglUE 9/ORHPQhoKpIbtos9v66Ure+q5Yzh8E4dfx17rfnj56DRVGMZ48NFMRdqbrKBq6d4yiz +1KIqlv1WPnhaTy42/eTqKcqByc0+gVOy8QwOIgOnTilSkRqgRx+Stcttm14P3pZYRNe gj9S9UJNmJ5100rWlh+lf45pA9vs5Wo4NPh9PHrqJGGj7JaRtH31kUwz2/r8Pomx+JgB LuUA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding; bh=42lYw5pCE0zNrU6J8q4nS26RrdDfNMoAQ5bEAgu6FyY=; b=bEVZmqdbba5MuWCXMmFaoSIuvb84He2EfZqERakQxWrvAKoHiTpiW7jW9o/ZTo78P6 JIo96hfQVmIt45MVw79GX6WuzKCBnZWEmAWW7cBDDv6yK6871+8mD2ar9+diWVtzYbLe HayMwel5XqVf/KLFkW6PhjhRRElXRo+gNuPNNbF2avR2B1SaEgf6FIGRb0vddfKHCvlT kVmnrt13xdSZIwCUsBJi3yiBjlaO5UTohFCteE5ONUYK8QKw0zxXedHptbvkZNXHgkN+ sqH8nAd4sew0Me+53ZvRgLaWT4qVsA4QigC0cZHgU1aITzsvnPvrFSYSQY/mJasqoi3l zGAw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530uV3annXdblunMtiqTilgZasZr0FI7+Wr9XXec4uLe+y+eYzJo imO9VesRkCiUoBXMXBJIh+Q= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy4D1kVJHSvjgoYqFFWfK67+f7kcziXcw85JVrXNW13LxUq0XVkv2DTSSFNqzvhlN17+fkosQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:3850:: with SMTP id nl16mr27555159pjb.127.1634487375841; Sun, 17 Oct 2021 09:16:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sbwpb-arch.flets-east.jp ([2400:4052:6980:3800:dba7:2b1f:3f26:a5ec]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c11sm16591363pji.38.2021.10.17.09.16.13 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sun, 17 Oct 2021 09:16:15 -0700 (PDT) From: Tsuchiya Yuto Cc: Hans de Goede , Tsuchiya Yuto , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Len Brown , Andy Shevchenko , Mika Westerberg , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: [RFC PATCH 0/1] add ccove PMIC i2c address for Microsoft Surface 3 Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2021 01:15:22 +0900 Message-Id: <20211017161523.43801-1-kitakar@gmail.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.33.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit To: unlisted-recipients:; (no To-header on input) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi all, Firstly, I'm still not used to Linux patch sending flow. Sorry in advance if there is some weirdness :-) but I did my best. I need to use the function intel_soc_pmic_exec_mipi_pmic_seq_element() with atomisp Image Signal Processing driver on Microsoft Surface 3 (Cherry Trail). However, it currently fails with the message I added to the commit message below. I wondered why. The driver intel_pmic_chtcrc does define the i2c address. It later turned out that the intel_pmic_bytcrc driver is used on surface3 instead, where the i2c address is not defined. So, I added the address with the patch I'm sending as RFC in this mail. It's working well. The question is that, should Surface 3 (Cherry Trail) really use the intel_pmic_bytcrc driver? As I wrote in the commit message, the _HRV value of the PMIC is 0x02, although the _DDN entry describes it as "CRYSTAL COVE+ AIC". So, maybe, it should rather use intel_pmic_chtcrc? Does anyone know the other instances where the _HRV value is 0x02 although it's based on Cherry Trail SoC ? So, I also tried using the intel_pmic_chtcrc driver instead, with the following (temporary) change [drivers/mfd/intel_soc_pmic_core.c]: + hrv = 0x03; + switch (hrv) { case BYT_CRC_HRV: config = &intel_soc_pmic_config_byt_crc; break; case CHT_CRC_HRV: config = &intel_soc_pmic_config_cht_crc; break; default: dev_warn(dev, "Unknown hardware rev %llu, assuming BYT\n", hrv); config = &intel_soc_pmic_config_byt_crc; } and the function intel_soc_pmic_exec_mipi_pmic_seq_element() worked well just like with the intel_pmic_bytcrc driver. I don't mind which driver is used on surface3 for now, considering that the atomisp driver is working with both PMIC drivers. But I'd like to hear from maintainers which is better :) Tested on surface3 with v5.15-rc5. Regards, Tsuchiya Yuto Tsuchiya Yuto (1): ACPI / PMIC: Add i2c address to intel_pmic_bytcrc driver drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic_bytcrc.c | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) -- 2.33.1