From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: lee.jones@linaro.org (Lee Jones) Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2016 13:12:53 +0100 Subject: [PATCH v2 3/4] mfd: add support for Allwinner SoCs ADC In-Reply-To: References: <1468576754-3273-1-git-send-email-quentin.schulz@free-electrons.com> <1468576754-3273-4-git-send-email-quentin.schulz@free-electrons.com> <20160719073109.GD17074@dell> Message-ID: <20160721121253.GE14925@dell> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wed, 20 Jul 2016, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > On 19/07/16 08:31, Lee Jones wrote: > > On Mon, 18 Jul 2016, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > > > >> On 15/07/16 10:59, Quentin Schulz wrote: > >>> The Allwinner SoCs all have an ADC that can also act as a touchscreen > >>> controller and a thermal sensor. For now, only the ADC and the thermal > >>> sensor drivers are probed by the MFD, the touchscreen controller support > >>> will be added later. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Quentin Schulz > >> Hmm. Previous patch includes the header this one creates. Ordering issue? > >> The depends kind of prevents build failures by ensuring that can't be built > >> until this one is in place, but it is certainly an ugly way to do it. > >> > >> Few little bits innline. > >>> --- > >>> > >>> v2: > >>> - add license headers, > >>> - reorder alphabetically includes, > >>> - add SUNXI_GPADC_ prefixes for defines, > >>> > >>> drivers/mfd/Kconfig | 14 +++ > >>> drivers/mfd/Makefile | 2 + > >>> drivers/mfd/sunxi-gpadc-mfd.c | 197 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >>> include/linux/mfd/sunxi-gpadc-mfd.h | 23 +++++ > >>> 4 files changed, 236 insertions(+) > >>> create mode 100644 drivers/mfd/sunxi-gpadc-mfd.c > >>> create mode 100644 include/linux/mfd/sunxi-gpadc-mfd.h > > > > [...] > > > >>> +static struct mfd_cell sun6i_gpadc_mfd_cells[] = { > >>> + { > >>> + .name = "sun6i-a31-gpadc-iio", > >>> + .resources = adc_resources, > >>> + .num_resources = ARRAY_SIZE(adc_resources), > >>> + }, { > >>> + .name = "iio_hwmon", > >> I still really dislike using this to force the probe of that driver but > >> kind of up to the hwmon / mfd guys on this. > > > > Can you at least say *why* you don't like it? > It just feels odd to have an mfd child that isn't really dependent > on the mfd hardware itself. > > Still if you are happy, mfd is your domain and my objections were > as you probably noticed not that strong - or well described!) > > So I'm fine with this. I see. So it's not actually part of the same IP/chip? > > How else would it get probed? > > > >> I don't have any better suggestions though.. > >>> + }, > >>> +}; > > > > [...] > > > >>> + if (ret) { > >>> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to add MFD devices: %d\n", ret); > >>> + regmap_del_irq_chip(irq, sunxi_gpadc_mfd_dev->regmap_irqc); > >>> + return ret; > >>> + } > >>> + > >>> + dev_info(&pdev->dev, "successfully loaded\n"); > >> Seems like noise to me, but not my subsystem :) > > > > Agreed, I don't allow this either. > > > > [...] > > > -- Lee Jones Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead Linaro.org ? Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog