From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759506AbcAKNfZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Jan 2016 08:35:25 -0500 Received: from mail-wm0-f46.google.com ([74.125.82.46]:37198 "EHLO mail-wm0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758058AbcAKNfX (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Jan 2016 08:35:23 -0500 Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 13:35:17 +0000 From: Lee Jones To: Chen-Yu Tsai Cc: Maxime Ripard , devicetree , linux-arm-kernel , linux-kernel , linux-sunxi , Hans de Goede , Mark Brown , Andy Shevchenko , Rob Herring Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 6/9] mfd: axp20x: Add support for RSB based AXP223 PMIC Message-ID: <20160111133517.GH19803@x1> References: <1450283538-25067-1-git-send-email-wens@csie.org> <1450283538-25067-7-git-send-email-wens@csie.org> <20160111092427.GI14104@x1> <20160111120902.GE19803@x1> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 11 Jan 2016, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote: > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 8:09 PM, Lee Jones wrote: > > On Mon, 11 Jan 2016, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote: > >> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 5:24 PM, Lee Jones wrote: > >> > On Thu, 17 Dec 2015, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote: > >> > > >> >> The AXP223 is a new PMIC commonly paired with Allwinner A23/A33 SoCs. > >> >> It is functionally identical to AXP221; only the regulator default > >> >> voltage/status and the external host interface are different. > >> >> > >> >> Signed-off-by: Chen-Yu Tsai > >> >> --- > >> >> drivers/mfd/Kconfig | 11 +++++++ > >> >> drivers/mfd/Makefile | 1 + > >> >> drivers/mfd/axp20x-rsb.c | 78 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> >> drivers/mfd/axp20x.c | 2 ++ > >> >> include/linux/mfd/axp20x.h | 1 + > >> >> 5 files changed, 93 insertions(+) > >> >> create mode 100644 drivers/mfd/axp20x-rsb.c > > > > [...] > > > >> >> +static int axp20x_rsb_probe(struct sunxi_rsb_device *rdev) > >> >> +{ > >> >> + struct axp20x_dev *axp20x; > >> >> + int ret; > >> >> + > >> >> + axp20x = devm_kzalloc(&rdev->dev, sizeof(*axp20x), GFP_KERNEL); > >> >> + if (!axp20x) > >> >> + return -ENOMEM; > >> >> + > >> >> + axp20x->dev = &rdev->dev; > >> >> + axp20x->irq = rdev->irq; > >> >> + sunxi_rsb_device_set_drvdata(rdev, axp20x); > >> > > >> > What's the point of this call? Why do you need a sunxi_ variant? > >> > >> This is an inline call defined in include/linux/sunxi-rsb.h, > >> which is equivalent to dev_set_drvdata(&rdev->dev, data). > >> > >> It seems many subsystems or bus drivers have this pattern. > >> > >> git grep void.*_set_drvdata include/linux/ | wc -l > >> > >> yields 34, not including dev_set_drvdata itself and this sunxi_rsb > >> variant. > > > > That doesn't answer my question. Why is it required? > > > > Looks like superfluous churn to me. Aggregation for the sake of it. > > I assumed it better to use functions matching the specific bus, and also > matching sunxi_rsb_device_get_drvdata() in the remove function. There are seldom good reasons to do that, since the generic calls do an outstanding job already. > But since we already get "struct device" two lines above, it's already > leaking the implementation, which beats the purpose of the wrapper. I'll > replace it with dev_set_drvdata() in the next version. Much better, thank you. > >> >> + ret = axp20x_match_device(axp20x); > >> >> + if (ret) > >> >> + return ret; > >> >> + > >> >> + axp20x->regmap = devm_regmap_init_sunxi_rsb(rdev, axp20x->regmap_cfg); > >> >> + if (IS_ERR(axp20x->regmap)) { > >> >> + ret = PTR_ERR(axp20x->regmap); > >> >> + dev_err(&rdev->dev, "regmap init failed: %d\n", ret); > >> >> + return ret; > >> >> + } > >> >> + > >> >> + return axp20x_device_probe(axp20x); > >> >> +} > >> >> + > >> >> +static int axp20x_rsb_remove(struct sunxi_rsb_device *rdev) > >> >> +{ > >> >> + struct axp20x_dev *axp20x = sunxi_rsb_device_get_drvdata(rdev); > >> >> + > >> >> + return axp20x_device_remove(axp20x); > >> >> +} > >> >> + > >> >> +static const struct of_device_id axp20x_rsb_of_match[] = { > >> >> + { .compatible = "x-powers,axp223", .data = (void *)AXP223_ID }, > >> >> + { }, > >> >> +}; > >> >> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, axp20x_rsb_of_match); > >> >> + > >> >> +static struct sunxi_rsb_driver axp20x_rsb_driver = { > >> >> + .driver = { > >> >> + .name = "axp20x-rsb", > >> >> + .of_match_table = of_match_ptr(axp20x_rsb_of_match), > >> >> + }, > >> >> + .probe = axp20x_rsb_probe, > >> >> + .remove = axp20x_rsb_remove, > >> >> +}; > >> >> +module_sunxi_rsb_driver(axp20x_rsb_driver); > >> >> + > >> >> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("PMIC MFD sunXi RSB driver for AXP20X"); > >> >> +MODULE_AUTHOR("Chen-Yu Tsai "); > >> >> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2"); > >> >> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/axp20x.c b/drivers/mfd/axp20x.c > >> >> index 54a00168da26..968d77fb95d8 100644 > >> >> --- a/drivers/mfd/axp20x.c > >> >> +++ b/drivers/mfd/axp20x.c > >> >> @@ -33,6 +33,7 @@ static const char * const axp20x_model_names[] = { > >> >> "AXP202", > >> >> "AXP209", > >> >> "AXP221", > >> >> + "AXP223", > >> >> "AXP288", > >> >> }; > >> >> > >> >> @@ -616,6 +617,7 @@ int axp20x_match_device(struct axp20x_dev *axp20x) > >> >> axp20x->regmap_irq_chip = &axp20x_regmap_irq_chip; > >> >> break; > >> >> case AXP221_ID: > >> >> + case AXP223_ID: > >> >> axp20x->nr_cells = ARRAY_SIZE(axp22x_cells); > >> >> axp20x->cells = axp22x_cells; > >> >> axp20x->regmap_cfg = &axp22x_regmap_config; > >> >> diff --git a/include/linux/mfd/axp20x.h b/include/linux/mfd/axp20x.h > >> >> index 00697c6ad8b0..d82e7d51372b 100644 > >> >> --- a/include/linux/mfd/axp20x.h > >> >> +++ b/include/linux/mfd/axp20x.h > >> >> @@ -18,6 +18,7 @@ enum { > >> >> AXP202_ID, > >> >> AXP209_ID, > >> >> AXP221_ID, > >> >> + AXP223_ID, > >> >> AXP288_ID, > >> >> NR_AXP20X_VARIANTS, > >> >> }; > >> > > > -- Lee Jones Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog