Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 27 Jun 2022 10:37:31 +0530 | Subject | Re: [PATCH V15 6/9] mfd: pm8008: Use i2c_new_dummy_device() API | From | "Satya Priya Kakitapalli (Temp)" <> |
| |
Hi Lee,
On 6/20/2022 4:37 PM, Satya Priya Kakitapalli (Temp) wrote: > > On 6/20/2022 1:50 PM, Lee Jones wrote: >> On Mon, 20 Jun 2022, Satya Priya Kakitapalli (Temp) wrote: >> >>> On 6/17/2022 2:27 AM, Lee Jones wrote: >>>> On Tue, 14 Jun 2022, Satya Priya wrote: >>>> >>>>> Use i2c_new_dummy_device() to register pm8008-regulator >>>>> client present at a different address space, instead of >>>>> defining a separate DT node. This avoids calling the probe >>>>> twice for the same chip, once for each client pm8008-infra >>>>> and pm8008-regulator. >>>>> >>>>> As a part of this define pm8008_regmap_init() to do regmap >>>>> init for both the clients and define pm8008_get_regmap() to >>>>> pass the regmap to the regulator driver. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Satya Priya <quic_c_skakit@quicinc.com> >>>>> Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@chromium.org> >>>>> --- >>>>> Changes in V15: >>>>> - None. >>>>> >>>>> Changes in V14: >>>>> - None. >>>>> >>>>> Changes in V13: >>>>> - None. >>>>> >>>>> drivers/mfd/qcom-pm8008.c | 34 >>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- >>>>> include/linux/mfd/qcom_pm8008.h | 9 +++++++++ >>>>> 2 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>>> create mode 100644 include/linux/mfd/qcom_pm8008.h >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/qcom-pm8008.c b/drivers/mfd/qcom-pm8008.c >>>>> index 569ffd50..55e2a8e 100644 >>>>> --- a/drivers/mfd/qcom-pm8008.c >>>>> +++ b/drivers/mfd/qcom-pm8008.c >>>>> @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@ >>>>> #include <linux/interrupt.h> >>>>> #include <linux/irq.h> >>>>> #include <linux/irqdomain.h> >>>>> +#include <linux/mfd/qcom_pm8008.h> >>>>> #include <linux/module.h> >>>>> #include <linux/of_device.h> >>>>> #include <linux/of_platform.h> >>>>> @@ -57,6 +58,7 @@ enum { >>>>> struct pm8008_data { >>>>> struct device *dev; >>>>> + struct regmap *regulators_regmap; >>>>> int irq; >>>>> struct regmap_irq_chip_data *irq_data; >>>>> }; >>>>> @@ -150,6 +152,12 @@ static struct regmap_config >>>>> qcom_mfd_regmap_cfg = { >>>>> .max_register = 0xFFFF, >>>>> }; >>>>> +struct regmap *pm8008_get_regmap(const struct pm8008_data *chip) >>>>> +{ >>>>> + return chip->regulators_regmap; >>>>> +} >>>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pm8008_get_regmap); >>>> Seems like abstraction for the sake of abstraction. >>>> >>>> Why not do the dereference inside the regulator driver? >>> To derefer this in the regulator driver, we need to have the >>> pm8008_data >>> struct definition in the qcom_pm8008 header file. >>> >>> I think it doesn't look great to have only that structure in header >>> and all >>> other structs and enum in the mfd driver. >> Then why pass 'pm8008_data' at all? > > > There is one more option, instead of passing the pm8008_data, we could > pass the pdev->dev.parent and get the pm8008 chip data directly in the > pm8008_get_regmap() like below > > > struct regmap *pm8008_get_regmap(const struct device *dev) > { > const struct pm8008_data *chip = dev_get_drvdata(dev); > > return chip->regulators_regmap; > } > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pm8008_get_regmap); > > > By doing this we can avoid having declaration of pm8008_data also in > the header. Please let me know if this looks good. >
Could you please confirm on this?
>> What's preventing you from passing 'regmap'? > > > I didn't get what you meant here, could you please elaborate a bit? > >
| |