From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753833AbbJZKj4 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Mon, 26 Oct 2015 06:39:56 -0400
Received: from mail-wi0-f181.google.com ([209.85.212.181]:32951 "EHLO
	mail-wi0-f181.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1753669AbbJZKjz (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 26 Oct 2015 06:39:55 -0400
Message-ID: <562E02F2.50709@linaro.org>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2015 10:39:46 +0000
From: Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>
CC: andrew-ct.chen@mediatek.com,
        Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>, Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@arm.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk>,
        Kumar Gala <galak@codeaurora.org>,
        Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        srv_heupstream@mediatek.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] nvmem: mediatek: Add Mediatek EFUSE driver
References: <1444984751-4572-1-git-send-email-andrew-ct.chen@mediatek.com> <1444984751-4572-3-git-send-email-andrew-ct.chen@mediatek.com> <562DF8C8.8060600@linaro.org> <20151026102834.GE25308@pengutronix.de>
In-Reply-To: <20151026102834.GE25308@pengutronix.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org



On 26/10/15 10:28, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 09:56:24AM +0000, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote:
>>> +	.val_bits = 32,
>>> +	.reg_stride = 4,
>>> +};
>>> +
>>> +static int mtk_efuse_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>> +{
>>> +	struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
>>> +	struct resource *res;
>>> +	struct nvmem_device *nvmem;
>>> +	struct nvmem_config *econfig;
>>> +	struct regmap *regmap;
>>> +	void __iomem *base;
>>> +
>>> +	res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 0);
>>> +	base = devm_ioremap_resource(dev, res);
>>> +	if (IS_ERR(base))
>>> +		return PTR_ERR(base);
>>> +
>>> +	econfig = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*econfig), GFP_KERNEL);
>>> +	if (!econfig)
>>> +		return -ENOMEM;
>> Why not use static econfig variable?
>
> Because drivers should not assume there is only one instance of them in
> the system. The qfprom driver does this and it's only a matter of
Good point, Yes, you are right. If MTK has possibility of having more 
than one efuse we can leave the code as it is.
> putting a second qcom,qfprom node into the device tree to break the
> driver.
It would indeed.
--srini
>
> Sascha
>