From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pf1-f177.google.com (mail-pf1-f177.google.com [209.85.210.177]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E0F4312BF11 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2024 18:02:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.210.177 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1707933766; cv=none; b=d7BkKbryfuK9WQxQ3Ex2EAmNcbiv6PL6Niv29IKGRAyQX1oh0RPkEAAFIGgGl/KWPeKtylTeGG6wKfgI4GAjN6E2OMMYxbYkNiaYuf9ma0NKvc3n+g38OHbCp9A9Oc9+c2GoPYUBweujBncxabbLGuo91xHI0hPtMrouzv3hoik= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1707933766; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Dn8Yf9ohMCVYwaXn9xt9wqXH07NnHBYPagCsBQQza38=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=HVF3BxcuWWXFeFwhhOzg+kxj0dVWHor0FO/S+GqUGzcpWf8dT10nbMMuxEnshYC39w8ORR9jJNi/Lml+lpwUXQoU9LOrnYI69H+aC522qFNTtnClrEPvJQjfQQY/FmyIseZiifUKQzVCmWoqd4GEUwsNNskNWxTAeM5yfO/kl9U= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=baylibre.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.210.177 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=baylibre.com Received: by mail-pf1-f177.google.com with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-6e10d08cb4fso483424b3a.0 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2024 10:02:44 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1707933764; x=1708538564; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:references :in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=PMJfvLePNW+r5ZqNm2Ch6Q0binx03GwTJpQuwxk2R24=; b=G+ElsPe3fgDpBUgrJoweOOlnTQ2YsKPTS3zZJRuALnmHE0xqeEEOH+cilhDiCX+W2G OQ8UMkbXFP48xdsjtyU5ZG4D1DlJ4GC6nNEPnpfWW6WlCAx6aHEjlAaSgNUHZ16E2eaj OqZEfEF5gBqnxU66WJNYUa+MfGRISUd7GNUnegMZ0F45yC3mtCe2UNSmAe/EA1009slB 4WYvWvShX45dZPcpF1Y6TFbe7ceU5vmMbgijfoND2ZhBu8D2xJbSbXCju46F2YnU6UPs Xp3N77WmZ990tMO0WH9LFyvZJwTzbMWkrQRBt9xt0Xe0pBWCHird/qd2JgKU3bf1Jdst /PRw== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCWbnduf9nJ5rIEzPLNghNFH819a/6Q0OyF+RrmdlvHZUDUdXJH491DNtAEhVkmFAMRx0yRtrQZVklNRKd8lTrWJEfpNCKrSxnjLe2mk X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yy6HBGGGOEBRHLKWYDo9ruOcCGJqA/Xs0LowKnW6/h1Skp+4hSx LNk6fyNbXId+JFUEecrkTK+eKMNx9acjG3yV0yjKbm0b0Hoto4lrWVOclvFszKU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFjOxETxVsVXKwukbbq2O521EndVIHxuM/6CgL2FSRzyaA/fnhtAcZfZBZklFd5yIpLmvaj3w== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a21:3a84:b0:19e:b477:33a4 with SMTP id zv4-20020a056a213a8400b0019eb47733a4mr3973134pzb.27.1707933764227; Wed, 14 Feb 2024 10:02:44 -0800 (PST) X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCULxq1SGeV5gBCWcwYdeJVGn8aW5V5K9HiqGq6clZ5Wm4x0VwZAQD9Eu9zGQ70Ray/ifa0zGSeNJCPKdEjmwJzmgf4D79S2pf5ZQc4zfgnsnYJ6x12heJlwbueus7A6Mh1b6EBIMPOEH5Q1Y4ZjD6hKtiygQ2J3NfUzBZo6DJmn2+zahl1mi0FDT3UxFk+tcuNAhPAH/FAJgmCD6tAEEz2J2/sbhtT8xA+G/3QmGNqGfTxPsYXrPQrVab9Gptn3DpipaGLKKvwIIuzQP5CxTbfz5+yvbFZuyS2GBKY6gXEQiIyG/ePCKu9QfsmekUvf8vWwDw5rf3XUwODb1dn5fzoxWLbu2GvZX+gTHqYvDb4c1nBxvCRgsKwY0I6HllMH8L4VJbTX0kCHIqPAzso7G3IA0FI6omEOHUmjZ7yQsGnwintoYWrKU7pGvRpSHm/EX+dbfNU858uHfspDFC+QSv/bA3+2Lu1IWse5g+fq1QWW7AhswEpAixAtUVJrlKygMhQLiy8l/XKCk8a+woVPtVyn363pCMAjyYU+MD+P0E8HhunMvkEJyTN4hoexy79Pno4T0mjR84qLMhjYWg== Received: from localhost (71-212-63-227.tukw.qwest.net. [71.212.63.227]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u33-20020a056a0009a100b006e0f7b8d15bsm3722898pfg.185.2024.02.14.10.02.42 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 14 Feb 2024 10:02:42 -0800 (PST) From: Kevin Hilman To: Conor Dooley Cc: Bhargav Raviprakash , arnd@arndb.de, broonie@kernel.org, conor+dt@kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, jpanis@baylibre.com, kristo@kernel.org, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org, lee@kernel.org, lgirdwood@gmail.com, linus.walleij@linaro.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, m.nirmaladevi@ltts.com, nm@ti.com, robh+dt@kernel.org, vigneshr@ti.com Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v1 03/13] dt-bindings: mfd: ti,tps6594: Add TI TPS65224 PMIC In-Reply-To: <20240214-depraved-unfunded-3f0b3d6bf3e2@spud> References: <20240209-blitz-fidgety-78469aa80d6d@spud> <20240214093106.86483-1-bhargav.r@ltts.com> <20240214-galley-dweller-1e9872229d80@spud> <7hil2r5556.fsf@baylibre.com> <20240214-depraved-unfunded-3f0b3d6bf3e2@spud> Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2024 10:02:42 -0800 Message-ID: <7hfrxu6i0t.fsf@baylibre.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Conor Dooley writes: > On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 09:26:13AM -0800, Kevin Hilman wrote: >> Conor Dooley writes: >> > On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 03:01:06PM +0530, Bhargav Raviprakash wrote: >> >> On Fri 2/9/2024 10:41 PM, Conor Dooley wrote: >> >> > On Thu, Feb 08, 2024 at 04:23:33PM +0530, Bhargav Raviprakash wrote: >> >> > > TPS65224 is a Power Management IC with 4 Buck regulators and 3 LDO >> >> > > regulators, it includes additional features like GPIOs, watchdog,= ESMs >> >> > > (Error Signal Monitor), and PFSM (Pre-configurable Finite State M= achine) >> >> > > managing the state of the device. >> >> >=20 >> >> > > TPS6594 and TPS65224 have significant functional overlap. >> >> >=20 >> >> > What does "significant functional overlap" mean? Does one implement= a >> >> > compatible subset of the other? I assume the answer is no, given th= ere >> >> > seems to be some core looking registers at different addresses. >> >>=20 >> >> The intention behind =E2=80=9Csignificant functional overlap=E2=80=9D= was meant to >> >> indicate a lot of the features between TPS6594 and TPS65224 overlap, >> >> while there are some features specific to TPS65224. >> >> There is compatibility between the PMIC register maps, I2C, PFSM, >> >> and other drivers even though there are some core registers at >> >> different addresses. >> >>=20 >> >> Would it be more appropriate to say the 2 devices are compatible and = have >> >> sufficient feature overlap rather than significant functional overlap? >> > >> > If core registers are at different addresses, then it is unlikely that >> > these devices are compatible. >>=20 >> That's not necessarily true. Hardware designers can sometimes be >> creative. :) > > Hence "unlikely" in my mail :) > >> > In this context, compatible means that existing software intended for >> > the 6594 would run without modification on the 65224, although maybe >> > only supporting a subset of features. If that's not the case, then >> > the devices are not compatible. >>=20 >> Compatible is a fuzzy term... so we need to get into the gray area. >>=20 >> What's going on here is that this new part is derivative in many >> signifcant (but not all) ways from an existing similar part. When >> writing drivers for new, derivative parts, there's always a choice >> between 1) extending the existing driver (using a new compatible string >> & match table for the diffs) or 2) creating a new driver which will have >> a bunch of duplicated code. >>=20 >> The first verion of this series[1] took the 2nd approach, but due to the >> significant functional (and feature) overlap, the recommendation was >> instead to take the "reuse" path to avoid signficant amounts of >> duplicated code. >>=20 >> Of course, it's possible that while going down the "reuse" path, there >> may be a point where creating a separate driver for some aspects might >> make sense, but that needs to be justified. Based on a quick glance of >> what I see in this series so far (I have not done a detailed review), >> the differences with the new device look to me like they can be handled >> with chip-specific data in a match table. > > This is all nice information, but not really relevant here - this is a > binding patch, not a driver one & the conversation stemmed from me > making sure that a fallback compatible was not suitable. hehe, oops. . my fault for mixing the two together Sorry for the noise. Kevin