Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] misc: Add power-efuse driver

[Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 03:09:53PM -0700, Zev Weiss wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 12:23:44AM PST, Zev Weiss wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 07, 2022 at 11:07:57PM PST, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > 
> > > > +EFUSE_ERROR_ATTR(under_voltage, REGULATOR_ERROR_UNDER_VOLTAGE);
> > > > +EFUSE_ERROR_ATTR(over_current, REGULATOR_ERROR_OVER_CURRENT);
> > > > +EFUSE_ERROR_ATTR(regulation_out, REGULATOR_ERROR_REGULATION_OUT);
> > > > +EFUSE_ERROR_ATTR(fail, REGULATOR_ERROR_FAIL);
> > > > +EFUSE_ERROR_ATTR(over_temp, REGULATOR_ERROR_OVER_TEMP);
> > > > +EFUSE_ERROR_ATTR(under_voltage_warn, REGULATOR_ERROR_UNDER_VOLTAGE_WARN);
> > > > +EFUSE_ERROR_ATTR(over_current_warn, REGULATOR_ERROR_OVER_CURRENT_WARN);
> > > > +EFUSE_ERROR_ATTR(over_voltage_warn, REGULATOR_ERROR_OVER_VOLTAGE_WARN);
> > > > +EFUSE_ERROR_ATTR(over_temp_warn, REGULATOR_ERROR_OVER_TEMP_WARN);
> > > > +
> > > > +static struct attribute *efuse_attrs[] = {
> > > > +	&dev_attr_operstate.attr,
> > > > +	&dev_attr_under_voltage.attr,
> > > > +	&dev_attr_over_current.attr,
> > > > +	&dev_attr_regulation_out.attr,
> > > > +	&dev_attr_fail.attr,
> > > > +	&dev_attr_over_temp.attr,
> > > > +	&dev_attr_under_voltage_warn.attr,
> > > > +	&dev_attr_over_current_warn.attr,
> > > > +	&dev_attr_over_voltage_warn.attr,
> > > > +	&dev_attr_over_temp_warn.attr,
> > > > +	NULL,
> > > > +};
> > > > +ATTRIBUTE_GROUPS(efuse);
> > > 
> > > Shouldn't these all just be what all regulator drivers report?  Or power
> > > drivers?  I find it odd that this would be the first driver that would
> > > need to export these types of attributes.  Surely there's already a
> > > class for this?
> > > 
> > 
> > The attributes available from the underlying regulator device don't
> > include the error flags, and while they do include its state
> > ('operstate' here), it's a read-only attribute, and from previous
> > discussions with Mark I gathered that was unlikely to change (whereas it
> > being read-write is a critical part of this driver's functionality).
> > 
> > Given his input on the first stab at this I took a while back, I've been
> > hoping to hear from Mark as to whether this looked more like something
> > he'd find palatable; perhaps he could chime in on this too?  (And/or on
> > the regulator API question in the cover letter.)
> > 
> 
> Ping...Mark (or Liam?), any thoughts on an appropriate path forward on this?

Make it a regular regulator driver please.

thanks,

greg k-h