From: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
To: "Vaittinen, Matti" <Matti.Vaittinen@fi.rohmeurope.com>
Cc: "dmurphy@ti.com" <dmurphy@ti.com>,
"linux-leds@vger.kernel.org" <linux-leds@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org" <linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"mazziesaccount@gmail.com" <mazziesaccount@gmail.com>,
"mturquette@baylibre.com" <mturquette@baylibre.com>,
"devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
"jacek.anaszewski@gmail.com" <jacek.anaszewski@gmail.com>,
"a.zummo@towertech.it" <a.zummo@towertech.it>,
"linus.walleij@linaro.org" <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
"lgirdwood@gmail.com" <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
"mark.rutland@arm.com" <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
"robh+dt@kernel.org" <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
"bgolaszewski@baylibre.com" <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>,
"linux-clk@vger.kernel.org" <linux-clk@vger.kernel.org>,
"pavel@ucw.cz" <pavel@ucw.cz>,
"sboyd@kernel.org" <sboyd@kernel.org>,
"broonie@kernel.org" <broonie@kernel.org>,
"lee.jones@linaro.org" <lee.jones@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 09/13] mfd: rtc: support RTC on ROHM BD71828 with BD70528 driver
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2019 14:50:21 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191029135021.GC11234@piout.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bf7a8ce661277aca3c4dede5fb17ef4163a56027.camel@fi.rohmeurope.com>
On 23/10/2019 10:27:43+0000, Vaittinen, Matti wrote:
> Hello again Alexandre,
>
> On Thu, 2019-10-17 at 12:48 +0200, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> > On 17/10/2019 10:36:44+0000, Vaittinen, Matti wrote:
> > > Hello Alexandre,
> > >
> > > Thanks for quick check! I'll be off for the rest of the week but I
> > > will
> > > re-work this patch at next week :) I agree with you regarding most
> > > of
> > > the comments.
> > >
> > > > > +
> > > > > +
> > > > > +/*
> > > > > + * RTC definitions shared between
> > > > > + *
> > > > > + * BD70528
> > > > > + * and BD71828
> > > > > + */
> > > > > +
> > > > > +#define ROHM_BD1_MASK_RTC_SEC 0x7f
> > > > > +#define ROHM_BD1_MASK_RTC_MINUTE 0x7f
> > > > > +#define ROHM_BD1_MASK_RTC_HOUR_24H 0x80
> > > > > +#define ROHM_BD1_MASK_RTC_HOUR_PM 0x20
> > > > > +#define ROHM_BD1_MASK_RTC_HOUR 0x3f
> > > > > +#define ROHM_BD1_MASK_RTC_DAY 0x3f
> > > > > +#define ROHM_BD1_MASK_RTC_WEEK 0x07
> > > > > +#define ROHM_BD1_MASK_RTC_MONTH 0x1f
> > > > > +#define ROHM_BD1_MASK_RTC_YEAR 0xff
> > > > > +#define ROHM_BD1_MASK_ALM_EN 0x7
> > > > > +
> > > >
> > > > All that renaming is distracting and useless. Please resubmit
> > > > without
> > > > renaming defines, structs and functions to make it easier to
> > > > review.
> > >
> > > I would prefer renaming because it makes it clearly visible which
> > > defines/structs/functions are common for both PMICs and which are
> > > PMIC
> > > specific. But I really understand the problem of spotting real
> > > changes.
> > > Would it be Ok if I did renaming in separate patch which does not
> > > bring
> > > in any other changes - and then the functional changes in separate
> > > patch?
> > >
> >
> > No, unless you can guarantee that all future PMICs from rohm matching
> > the wildcard will use this driver.
> >
> I started re-working this patch and remembered my original idea
> regarding the naming :) I should have commented it as I had already
> forgotten it. You are correct what comes to the difficulty of using
> correct wild-cards. And I agree with you what comes to function and
> struct names like bd7xx28 - those are somewhat fragile as next PMIC
> which we want to support with this driver may be BD12345 - yielding our
> wild-card useless.
>
> But if we take a look of common definitions in header rohm-shared.h
> which I added - those are prefixed as ROHM_BD1. My idea was introducing
> this common RTC define group 1 - which would be common define group for
> all devices which belong to BD1 group. Currently that would be BD71828
> and BD70528. What was missing is the comment explaining this (and lack
> of comment made this useless as even I forgot it already).
>
> I already reverted this naming change and all BD70528 specific and
> common defines/functions/enums are prefixed with the good old BD70528.
> Only new definitions which I added for BD71828 are prefixed with
> BD71828. But how do you see the grouping the common defines to format
> ROHM_BD<group number>_FOO_BAR in the rohm-shared.h - with comment that
> group BD1 consists of definitions which are common for BD70528 and
> BD71828?
>
> My only fear when using prefix BD70528 for common defines is that
> someone changes some defines to match the BD70528 data-sheet without
> evaluating if this impacts to other PMICs. It may be useless paranoia
> though - hence I am asking for your opinion at this phase. I can do
> this grouping in own patch - or just leave it as it is now in my local
> repo - with the old BD70528 being common prefix.
>
I don't think those masks will ever change, all the BCD RTCs are using
the same.
Note that ROHM_BD1_MASK_RTC_HOUR_24H, ROHM_BD1_MASK_RTC_HOUR_PM and
ROHM_BD1_MASK_ALM_EN are bits and should use BIT() to make that clear.
Those may change later but I don't see how someone looking at the
BD70528 datasheet would get those wrong.
--
Alexandre Belloni, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-29 13:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-17 9:40 [RFC PATCH 00/13] Support ROHM BD71828 PMIC Matti Vaittinen
2019-10-17 9:41 ` [RFC PATCH 01/13] mfd: bd71828: Support ROHM BD71828 PMIC - core Matti Vaittinen
2019-10-17 9:42 ` [RFC PATCH 02/13] mfd: input: bd71828: Add power-key support Matti Vaittinen
2019-10-17 9:43 ` [RFC PATCH 03/13] clk: bd718x7: Support ROHM BD71828 clk block Matti Vaittinen
2019-10-17 9:44 ` [RFC PATCH 04/13] regulator: bd718x7: Split driver to common and bd718x7 specific parts Matti Vaittinen
2019-10-17 9:44 ` [RFC PATCH 05/13] regulator: bd71828: Basic support for ROHM bd71828 PMIC regulators Matti Vaittinen
2019-10-17 9:48 ` [RFC PATCH 06/13] regulator: bd71828: Add GPIO based run-level control for regulators Matti Vaittinen
2019-10-17 9:50 ` [RFC PATCH 07/13] regulator: bd71828: enhanced run-level support Matti Vaittinen
2019-10-17 9:51 ` [RFC PATCH 08/13] regulator: bd71828: Support in-kernel APIs to change run-level Matti Vaittinen
2019-10-17 9:52 ` [RFC PATCH 09/13] mfd: rtc: support RTC on ROHM BD71828 with BD70528 driver Matti Vaittinen
2019-10-17 10:12 ` Alexandre Belloni
2019-10-17 10:36 ` Vaittinen, Matti
2019-10-17 10:48 ` Alexandre Belloni
2019-10-21 5:29 ` Vaittinen, Matti
2019-10-23 10:27 ` Vaittinen, Matti
2019-10-29 13:50 ` Alexandre Belloni [this message]
2019-10-29 14:08 ` Vaittinen, Matti
2019-10-17 9:53 ` [RFC PATCH 10/13] gpio: bd71828: Initial support for ROHM BD71828 PMIC GPIOs Matti Vaittinen
2019-10-17 12:45 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2019-10-21 7:00 ` Vaittinen, Matti
2019-10-21 14:36 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2019-10-21 14:56 ` Vaittinen, Matti
2019-10-22 13:19 ` Vaittinen, Matti
2019-10-17 9:53 ` [RFC PATCH 11/13] led: bd71828: Support LED outputs on ROHM BD71828 PMIC Matti Vaittinen
2019-10-17 14:04 ` Dan Murphy
2019-10-17 14:28 ` Alexandre Belloni
2019-10-21 8:00 ` Vaittinen, Matti
2019-10-21 19:09 ` Jacek Anaszewski
2019-10-22 12:40 ` Vaittinen, Matti
2019-10-22 17:40 ` Jacek Anaszewski
2019-10-23 8:37 ` Vaittinen, Matti
2019-10-23 21:59 ` Jacek Anaszewski
2019-10-24 8:15 ` Vaittinen, Matti
2019-10-24 22:04 ` Jacek Anaszewski
2019-10-25 7:07 ` Vaittinen, Matti
2019-10-25 13:24 ` Rob Herring
2019-10-25 14:37 ` Vaittinen, Matti
2019-10-25 15:47 ` Rob Herring
2019-10-29 13:29 ` Vaittinen, Matti
2019-10-17 9:55 ` [RFC PATCH 12/13] dt-bindings: mfd: Document ROHM BD71282 bindings Matti Vaittinen
2019-10-17 14:18 ` Dan Murphy
2019-10-21 8:03 ` Vaittinen, Matti
2019-10-17 9:57 ` [RFC PATCH 13/13] dt-bindings: regulator: Document ROHM BD71282 regulator bindings Matti Vaittinen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20191029135021.GC11234@piout.net \
--to=alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com \
--cc=Matti.Vaittinen@fi.rohmeurope.com \
--cc=a.zummo@towertech.it \
--cc=bgolaszewski@baylibre.com \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=dmurphy@ti.com \
--cc=jacek.anaszewski@gmail.com \
--cc=lee.jones@linaro.org \
--cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
--cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-clk@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-leds@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mazziesaccount@gmail.com \
--cc=mturquette@baylibre.com \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=sboyd@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).